Toll road rejected
By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer
Coastal Commission votes down controversial project at North County's northern edge | ∞
Lynn Thomas of Capistrano Beach, who opposes the proposed toll road, left, exchanges a few heated words with Patricia Lochrie of Fullerton, right, who supports the proposed toll road, Wednesday during a coastal commission meeting at the Del Mar Fairgrounds.
BILL WECHTER Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
Visit our Photo Gallery
DEL MAR -- As a huge crowd erupted in cheers late Wednesday night, the California Coastal Commission voted to reject a transportation agency's request to pave a toll road across a popular North County state park. 
View A Video
Commissioners voted 8-2 not to certify that Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency's proposed 16-mile, $875 million tollway through south Orange County and North San Diego County adheres to the state's coastal protection law.
"This is a defining moment, I believe, for this California Coastal Commission," said Commissioner Larry Clark, who represents the Los Angeles-Orange County area. "And I think we need to articulate very clearly that this project is dead."
As soon as the commissioners voted at 11:20 p.m., most in the audience clapped and cheered for several minutes, yelling repeatedly: "Thank you!"
Most commissioners said they were left with little choice but to reject the project because of what they said were numerous, clear violations of the Coastal Act, as a result of threats to wildlife, cultural sites and the Trestles surfing spot.
"This project drives a stake through the heart of the Coastal Act," said Commissioner Sara Wan of Malibu. "This looks like something from the 1950s, not from the 21st Century, when we know how threatened our planet is."
Wan added, "It drives one species to extinction and pushes several other species to the brink of extinction."
The daylong hearing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds before well more than 3,000 people was a classic confrontation between those who want to preserve what is left of Southern California's natural coastal environment and those looking to provide relief for commuters on one of the region's most congested interstate highways.
Commissioners listened to more than 10 hours of testimony on both sides of the question from mayors, county officials, state lawmakers, surfers, environmentalists, American Indian tribe members, business leaders and others. But the lucky few who spoke were far outnumbered by the boisterous, sign-waving opponents and supporters who took turns chanting and trying to drown each other out.
They all packed the fairgrounds' cavernous Wyland Hall pavilion to debate the merits of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency's proposed 16-mile, $875 million toll road.
With four miles of the project proposed to be built on San Onofre State Beach, the fifth-most-visited of California's 278 state parks, the project has been a lightning rod for conservationists who have insisted the park is no place for a highway. And the commission's own staff suggested that the six-lane turnpike would threaten six imperiled animals, irreparably damage coastal wetlands and possibly dilute Trestles' world-famous surfing waves, among other things.
"This toll road project is precisely the kind of project that the Coastal Commission was created (in 1972) to prevent," said Peter Douglas, executive director of the commission staff.
Michael White, a biologist with the Conservation Biology Institute, was one of hundreds of environmentalists who agreed.
"We've destroyed virtually all of the natural resources in coastal Southern California," White said. "We should be doing everything within our power to protect these last natural areas."
Just as pressing, said Orange County Supervisor Pat Bates, is the need to unlock the bottleneck at the San Diego-Orange county line. The former North San Diego County state lawmaker said if the project is not built, "We will live at ground zero in a nightmare of choking traffic."
Both sides agree that Interstate 5 congestion is the reason for the project, which would extend Highway 241 south from its current end in Rancho Santa Margarita. Transportation officials contend it is the best idea for a relief valve for I-5, which carries 125,000 cars a day now at the San Diego-Orange county line and is expected to swell to 200,000 cars a day by 2020. Orange Mayor and Orange County Transit Authority board member Carolyn Cavecche said the toll road would by itself siphon 50,000 cars a day off of I-5.
Officials rejected an alternative that would entail widening I-5 in south Orange County, saying it wouldn't help enough, there is no money for it and it would require knocking out 1,200 homes and businesses.
Thomas Margro, Foothill/Eastern's chief executive officer, said, "This project is the best option for relieving traffic congestion with the least amount of impact on communities and the environment."
That point was vigorously disputed by environmental groups, surfers and other opponents. And they contended that a more effective cure to I-5's ills would be to improve I-5 itself. The Endangered Habitats League hired an East Coast consultant to study the I-5 alternative, and the result was an option that would require only 60 properties.
Also in considerable dispute was the amount of damage to sensitive lands that would occur. The Coastal Commission staff has estimated that 50 acres of wetlands and important habitat for endangered animals would be wiped out, while the agency contends the damage would be limited to a few acres -- and to a fraction of an acre when it comes to the San Mateo Creek itself.
"We designed the bridges with the longest spans possible to reduce the number of columns in the creek to four," Margro said.
The four columns would hold up bridges connecting the toll road to I-5.
As for the habitat of the creek-residing arroyo toad that would be permanently lost as a result, agency consultant Rob Roy Ramey said: "It's about the size of a two-car garage due to the bridge supports."
In an atmosphere much like a political convention, scores of environmentalists, surfers, park lovers and beachgoers who oppose the proposed project -- held up signs and wore blue T-shirts that said: "Save the park, stop the toll road."
Their chants were met by those of hundreds of construction workers and union representatives dressed in orange T-shirts, who shouted: "Toll road, yes!"
"This is democracy in action," observed Del Mar Councilwoman Crystal Crawford, a few minutes before the 12-member commission convened its meeting Wednesday morning.
Those on the two distinct sides of the controversial issue tried to drown each other out. Nick Malecha, 22, of San Diego, walked down an aisle with both hands holding up a sign that read: "Toll roads are for fat cats." A man in an orange shirt frowned in disgust as he walked passed Malecha, a surfer who recently moved to the county from Oahu, Hawaii.
About 30 feet away, toll-road opponent Chris Pearson of San Diego and project supporter Robert Ruiz of Riverside, a construction union representative, were debating the merits of the $875 million project.
"If you don't address the congestion on the (Interstate) 5 freeway now, we'll pay the price 20 years from now," Ruiz told Pearson. Ruiz said the traffic congestion only will get much worse and, with it, the environment, as more car-belched emissions foul the air and aggravate global warming.
But Pearson maintained that congestion is going to get worse in any case.
"I'd rather have people fighting traffic than ruin the beach," he said.
Referring to Trestles Beach, which is just west of where the proposed toll road would tie into I-5, Pearson said: "This is one of the best breaks in all of California."
Ruiz said there were economic reasons for supporting the project, as well. He told a reporter after the mini-debate that "this is a billion-dollar project that's going to create 15,000 jobs. And the way the economy is going right now, we could sure use the 15,000 jobs."
At one point, five American Indians led by Rebecca Robles, coordinator of the United Coalition to Protect Panhe, came up to the podium and sang a traditional song to call attention to the prehistoric village on the park that could be affected by the project.
Running through the park and near the village, the Highway 241 extension would complete a road coming down from Highway 91 -- and complete a 67-mile Orange County toll road system that has been under development for two decades.
Because the last two miles of the 241 would fall within the mile-wide coastal zone over which the commission has jurisdiction, the agency had to obtain a coastal development permit from the body before it can build. Before the commission Wednesday was a decision not concerning the actual permit, but a determination on whether the project is consistent with state and federal laws governing coastal areas. Such a determination is required before a permit can be issued.
Sara Townsend, a coastal program analyst, urged against such a determination because of potential impacts on the Pacific pocket mouse, arroyo toad, least Bell's vireo, coastal California gnatcatcher, tidewater goby and the southern steelhead trout. She said the road could push the pocket mouse to extinction.
And despite the agency's plan to construct a nearly mile-long, 16-foot-high sound wall to shield popular 161-space San Mateo Campground on the park, coastal analyst Cassidy Teufel said the road would still double the background noise campers would hear constantly.
Townsend also argued against the project because of concerns about Trestles' waves and the Panhe village, which is still used as a place to hold ceremonies. Agency contended both concerns have been adequately addressed in the project design.
Not only that, the agency contended that the water flowing into the ocean at San Onofre would be cleaner than now because the project would filter runoff from not only Highway 241 but I-5.
Ralph Faust, former chief counsel for the commission and an opponent, called the filter plan a "carrot" that is not a reason for approving the project. He also dismissed the agency's offer to donate $100 million to the cash-strapped state park system, to be used as state officials see fit.
"You can't buy compliance with the Coastal Act," Faust said. "This may be the ultimate carrot, but it's still just a carrot."
-- Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 745-6611, Ext. 2623, or ddowney@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Pamela wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:59 AM:YAHOO! WE DEFEATED THEM! THANK YOU COASTAL COMMISSIONERS!
Conni wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:41 AM:Thank you, Coastal Commission, for seing the TCA's proposal for what it truly is- a chance for the TCA to make a bunch of money building a Toll Road that the citizens of Orange County and San Diego do not need or want. This is not exclusively a "tree hugger" or environmentalist concern, but a concern for every person who lives in California and wants to preserve our quality of life. There are other solutions to the traffic and infrastructure concerns. No one is saying that trafic and safety are not important- we are saying that there is a better solution than the one proposed by the TCA. The TCA obviously only explored project ideas that would put themselves in charge, and make them lots of money- so much money that they were willing to pay the California State Parks up to $100 million to buy the approval of the project. Shame on you, TCA and thank you to the Coastal Commission for refusing to be bought. Now all citzens of California will be able to enjoy San Onofre State Beach, San Mateo Campground, and Trestles surf break for many years to come!
Chief wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:50 AM:Thank goodness that someone voted with their brains. Not like the usual political vote where the vote had been bought and paid for and the public opinion was heard on deaf ears. Not to mention any names but the Oceanside council does come to mind.
Yokozuna wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:07 AM:Although there may have been some benefit to Northbound I-5 there was no plan to relieve Southbound traffic from San Clemente. I guess no one in Orange County cared about that.
BOB wrote on Feb 7, 2008 5:22 AM:Toll roads are not the answer. Solar electric mass transit is the future! Thank you Coastal Commission for saving Tressles while rejecting 20th century planning.
Kathy wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:27 AM:Its great to wake up to great news this morning in California. Its heartening to see the Coastal Commission can actually read the staff reports and see through TCA's ... and misrepresentation of the facts. The public officials from San Diego County that were in favor of building the toll road ... should be ashamed that they aren't smart enough to recognize BS when they see it.
oside resident wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:34 AM:The time is here for all people to witness the power that a group of individuals can have when they stand on principle agianst those who stand for personal wealth and gain. Trestles has been saved! What a day, fat cats take the train! I personally did not expect the commission to vote this way as the local buracrats seems to side with money time after time..Let this be a lesson though to all those who do not participate in these activities out of cynicism for the process...Good Job activists and thank you for your service
Victory for the people wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:35 AM:Awesome victory for the people. The Coastal Commission did their jobs. They did not get bought. We need to preserve our open space, our parks, and certainly our ecological preserves, not to mention respect for the native Americans and protecting a great campsite and frequented park. Thanks to the Coastal Commission and to all the thousands and thousands of citizens across the world who want to protect this resource. Thank you just isn't enough to express gratitude for all of your hard work.
Too Bad wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:40 AM:I was hoping this would be approved so I could get home to my family earlier from work. Well I guess those that surf and camp all day and don't have real jobs need to be appeased. No new roads, no power line, no de-sal plant, and no land fill. Wow thanks to the environuts we are becoming a 3rd world country. Great!!
John wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:46 AM:The Commission's decision was really the only one possible given the strength of the evidence provided by the Commission's own staff and the opposition experts who showed up to testify. The toll road proponents brought out questionable 'expertutes', some of whom did not present themselves very professionally.
A long day and night for all, including those who showed up to demonstrate and testify, but worth it. Thank you California Coastal Commission.
Paul wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:51 AM:Another triumph over progress by the hysterical, anti-human left. The Coastal Commission is a farce, a carnival of imbeciles where emotion routinely trumps rational thought. The clowns are running the circus.
SO happy to hear... wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:52 AM:California has enough cars and concrete to fill the universe, and the last thing we needed was another ROAD. Especially one that would mow down yet another piece of our precious landscape. Thanks to all those who stood up to protect it, and to the Coastal Commission for doing the right thing! Now, please stick with this decision and don't accept any future proposals, because you KNOW they'll be back.
Oceansider wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:59 AM:Finally, a government entity that listened to the people and got it right. Kudos to the California Coastal Commission for their denial of this terrible project. Up next: the California Superior Court system.
C-bad believer wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:01 AM:Let's remember that the governor appoints members to the coastal commission: we cannot elect someone that will replace the current for more favorable development votes or else we'll see this get approved in a few years (the CC has to ebb and flow with politcal winds)- but thanks again for your brave vote !!!!
John wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:07 AM:Normally I favror ANY development over so-called "endangered" bugs, etc. but WHAT CONGESTION on the I-5 is there between Oceanside, and San Clemente that justifies a toll road?? I have driven that route more then once, and have yet to see ANY "gridlock" (except at the San Onofre Border Patrol station). Reconsider this in 10 years. It is NOT needed now!
SDNative born wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:15 AM:Now that SoCal is officially owned by the loudmouth anti-progress enviro-idiots and the pro-illegal alien/anti-free speech racist hispanic factions, most of which moved here from somewhere else, Arizona and Oklahoma are looking good. I am outta here to live among people that love their land, not just own it.
Nick wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:19 AM:FOR ONCE, they listened to the maority of citizens and not the few!
Annie-Viva Tressles wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:32 AM:I read this with tears of relief and elation. My husband took off from work, my two year old, friend and I were there yesterday for 9.5 hours, we were all exhausted from listening without yelling, patiently holding signs! THANK YOU, THANK YOU, for rewarding us and the generations following us in this small part of history. Glad to be a part of it! Oh btw I don't surf, but you don't have to, to see the OBVIOUS devastation this "solution to gridlock" would have caused our beautiful California coastline! Who wants to pay another toll for concrete rather than listen or watch waves or view just unpaved land. Oh what a day to remember.
Peace and see you and the families of the union workers at the beach and park!
Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:35 AM:The "majority" of citizens are not the bearded, pony-tailed 60's rejects who showed up at the Fairgrounds yesterday. The majority really are the people with normal families trying to make a living or driving their kids to school. What narcissism it is to see these anti-capitalist know-nothings "protest" against a road they knew little about. it was equally sad to see how the young get duped into saving worthless little rats and flies while ignoring the fact that they'll need jobs someday.
Drum-Circle time! wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:36 AM:Sweet! Let's all meet on the beach and dance in a drum-circle and play with the rats we saved! Down with roads, up with hippies!
JSten wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:43 AM:Mob Rule
A time honored tradition. Why wasn't this on a ballot?
NIMBYs wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:57 AM:I am sure "the people" are the same ones who complain of traffic on the freeways. While we can all enjoy a park, you can not stop progress. This while thing reeks of NIMBYism.
Now we can all go back to complaining about traffic.
Paul wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:01 AM:This is just one of the first battles in the war to get California of the freeway/tollway addiction. California is the 5th largest economy in the world and has NO public transportation. It should have county-wide rail systems connecting a high speed rail network to all major cities.
Kind of Funny wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:08 AM:It was very easy to tell who was for it and who wasn't by looking at the crowd. You could tell those that wanted it were the ones dressed for work, had jobs and paid taxes versus the other side that....well you can guess. They look like they definately take advantage of the beach and camp grounds. Another win for the takers and the providers keep on providing.
Good Morning wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:10 AM:Looks like the tide is turning! Thanks to the Coastal Commission for upholding the integrity of the California Coastal Act. "Too Bad," my husband worked hard to find a job close to home rather than having a commute like that. There are alternatives. Unlike endangered animals, we get to decide our fate.
To Too Bad wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:24 AM:There are a vast majority of the people who want to spend time with their families at the State Parks the road proponents seek to destroy.
Building another freeway is not the answer. You only have to look to L.A. to see that more and more freeways have not solved any traffic problems. If you look at the traffic patterns in L.A. you will see that traffic is heaviest at the freeway intersections.
To SD Native born wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:26 AM:You need to stop thinking only of your self and realize that progress doesn't meam building more roads!!!! You should be thanking these so called enviro-idiots for saving such a beautiful area of nature that your children and future generations will be able to enjoy.
Long View wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:26 AM:Save the right-of way, it will be needed.
Bud wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:26 AM:yeah, WE WON, WE WON, WE WON!!!!!!!Now all you evil and I mean evil commuters and hard working people who actually make this country go will have a much tougher time of earning a living and commuting to and from work.Now let's get rid of the republicans because they want us to work and keep the money we work hard for so we can give it to everyone who doesn't want to work. at least the democrats will have the government make all our decisions and let us have a little bit of our money that we work hard for,but just a little because the democrats know what everyone needs, they are so honest.
JP wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:27 AM:It was fitting that this taxpayer scam of a road was rejected on Ronald Reagan Day. Reagan wanted San Onofre state park preserved forever and now his wish will be honored. Toll roads are how they do things in Mexico. Thank goodness the Coastal Commission rejected the further Mexification of southern California.
Good Decision Made wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:29 AM:Yesterday and today are days to remember. The TCA is in it only for the money - MONEY. Those that showed up to protest along with all of the people behind them that couldn't be there were certainy not in it for the money. There is none for them. We all want to protect what is left of our coastline as well as our State Parks and especially the wildlife preserves that have bern set aside to protect our fragile and threatened species. Threre is no money in that, but we do it for the same reason that we protect places like the Wild Animal Park and zoos - to keep from extinction species that live on this earth. While I know that is an unpopular view for the supporters of the toll road, they ignored the very principles of the Environmental Quality Act. Thanks again to the California Coastal Commissionfor doing a great job.
Jerry in Carlsbad wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:34 AM:Thank you reason has prevailed. My Dad took me surfing at Trestles for the first time in the early 1970's. Thank god my children and grandchildren will continue that legacy. It's a sacred place and will remain that way for generations to come. Those that who would have the toll road built do not understand what is good for California. Dad you can rest in peace.
Bo wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:42 AM:To those that are whining about spending more time in traffic because we're not giving our coastal nature reserve to the Orange County Elite....MOVE CLOSER TO YOUR WORK!
Riff wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:58 AM:"Endangered animals," what a joke! Bogus science, bogus results. If the leftists are truly so terribly concerned with man's horrific and devastating impact on the planet then the only rational choice is suicide. Oops, I just exposed the environmentalists species plan for mankind!
Walt wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:59 AM:So now San Diego has the opportunity to out do Boston with a Big Big Dig.
Sam wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:10 AM:What was I did not hear mentioned was that the extension would have given developers 18 more miles of new development on both sides of the extension. This is one of the very few times I can say Thank You Coastal Commission!!!
Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:15 AM:The Coastal Commission is an undemocratic body, appointed by mostly far-left politicians, who unilaterally decide on projects better decided locally. They must have been breathing the pot-filled hot air emitted by the hundreds of enviro freaks yesterday. Too bad more normal citizens could not take the day off and be there yesterday to show what the real majority believes.
Jen wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:19 AM:Seriously, people need to be able to afford to live where they work. It's ridiculous to have drive an hour or more just to get started on the work day. Then the same thing coming home. Building more roads won't help in the long run. We need to look at a bigger picture to solve traffic issues.
To those that favor wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:39 AM:this decision. If you really want to protect the environment, bugs, animals etc. like you preach, I don't hear you advocating closing the Campground and Beach to everyone. All of you that go there are destroying natural habitat that you claim you want to protect. You leave behind surf wax, beer bottles/cans, roaches, not the bugs, trash etc. Very selfish of you!
So, What now? wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:39 AM:I-5, the only artery between San Diego and Los Angeles is only 8 lanes through Pendleton. There are plans to widen this to 12 lanes. But, there isn't enough room through Orange County to widen to that extent, even though portions in Irvine are that large, or larger. So, what now? Massive traffic jams continuing through Camp Pendleton? Or, will the Toll Road simply head east of Camp Pendleton into Temecula and down the 15? At least that solution will be outside the jurisdiction of Coastal ...!
franky wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:41 AM:A big fat thank you to all those that were responsible for fighting this. My family appreciate your coming together for the better good. You should wear your accomplishment on your sleeve. Your participation and involvement have shown that the power of the people is returning to the people. GREAT JOB HATS OFF TO YOU THANK YOU!
Rich wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:44 AM:I work in San Clemente and commute to and from North County San Diego every day. I know there are major traffic problems in Orange county, but frankly I don't see congestion in the areas surrounding camp Pendleton and San Clemente. On very rare occasions there might be some backup (a couple weeks during the races or fair at Del Mar, Etc..) but I just don't see why this interchange would be required in San Diego county anyway. Move it North where it is actually needed. Good job to the coastal commission.
to Bo wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:59 AM:perfect! no one should be able to choose what profession to work in because we should only be allowed to work within 10 miles of our homes.the government should tell us where to work and how much we should earn also.
Sore Losers wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:00 AM:I guess you can tell a book by it's cover. Seems that the pro-road group think that victory was snatched away by a bunch of dope smoking, government handout taking, unemployed, surfing hippies! I guess what they fail to realize is that not everyone is heaviliy invested in the career/mortgage rat race. Some have organized their lives in such a way as to take advantage of what this great state has to offer. Many are self employed, college educated, and whose work is not dependent on an office, on a commute, on a time clock, on a dress code. So guess what - they have time to surf, to hike, to birdwatch, and their 401(k) is fully funded! Might the pro road crowd be a tad jealous? Regardless, there are so many things wrong with this road that the only decision was a resounding NO. Good job CC!
Gene wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:09 AM:My business requires me to drive from Oceanside to Irvine several times a week. It can be a long, slow trip, and if I had to do it twice a day, every day, I would probably consider it a "hardship." But I think it probably should be, so that nobody who doesn't absolutely have to will consider doing it. Once everything between SD and LA has been bulldozed and paved over for highways full of cars, tollroad or freeway, what's left of the reason why most of us live here in the first place?
Osider wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:09 AM:THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU COASTAL COMMISSION! You did the right thing for the environment, but most of all, you did the right thing for access to our beaches. We attended the hearing and were amazed by the rudeness of the politicians who spoke on this project. Wow, what a bunch of snobs! Thank you Larry Clark for your very telling statements about the "fat cat" toll road use! LONG LIVE THE COASTAL ACT and THOSE THAT ARE CHARGED WITH PROTECTING IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Environmental Blindness wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:26 AM:The Surfers all claim this project would have polluted their "clean" beach. But, they seem to forget that up stream from their "clean" beach are a bunch artillery ranges that have been operating for over 70 years! There are extremely HIGH levels of heavy metals (lead, Copper, Brass, Uranium) and other "Nasty" pollutants that have been washing down these streams for many years. Moreover, upstream along San Mateo Creek TRW (now Northrop Grumman) there was a rocket motor test facility that operated from the early 1960's through the late 1980's. The amount of rocket propellant that has entered the water table and is still to this day flowing downstream and into the ocean is quite significant (though unseen by the surfers, even if they be impacted physically). This project would not have added any more pollution than was already present, and in fact would have required some of those "Nasties" to be cleaned up during the construction. Typical NIMBY Blindness of those who are ignorant of History, Biology, and their general surroundings!
To Rich wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:37 AM:I grew up in San Clemente. I remember well HWY101 and its two lanes going through Pendleton and SC. It was great when they opened I-5 with all those extra lanes! We were thankful that the State had finally cleanup all the congestion. Then, in the 1980's backups became the routine as the 8 lanes through Pendleton narrowed to 6 through San Clemente. They fianlly widened the freeway to 8 lanes through SC. But, we all knew that eventually there would come a need for another road to handle all the traffic that would eventually come. There is no more room to widen I-5 through SC or Capo Beach. Even SJC is near its maximum. True, the idea of bringing a road down to I-5 at the south end of SC was first proposed in the 80's. But, environmentalists have been fighting it ever since. Of course, what many of us who know thie area well have asked is, "why not a raod though the back country to Temecula?" Currently from South OC you have to go north to the Ortega (HWY74) or south to HWY76. Both ways are long, narrow, and very dangerous. So, why not realign this proposed toll-road around the back of Pendleton and out to Temecula. Connect Ave. Pico, and others into the route and create another east route to connect us all with Riverside. This would also relieve pressure on the 74,76, and 91/55. These areas are eventually going to merge anyway, so why not build it now and save a few lives?
Jamie wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:41 AM:Toll Roads are unAmerican!
Not a real vote wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:44 AM:This SHOULD have been on the ballot. That would have been the only true test of democracy. Now all we have is the opinion of a bunch of environmentalists and surfers who probably dont endure that traffic.
Waht's "Capitalist" about a land grab? wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:49 AM:Capitalism means you pay market rates for the resources you need to build your business. If OC wants the toll road, they can do eminent domain on LAND IN OC. The problem is that that makes the road uneconomical. The TCA wanted a SUBSIDY from the state parks system and San Diego county.
If OC wants the road, then OC can use OC land!
Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:52 AM:Toll Roads are actually MORE AMERICAN than freeways. Users pay for what THEY use, as opposed to all taxpayers begin shaken down to provide for others ,which is what the socialist left wants to see. Producers giving to takers.
Stay Home wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:52 AM:Wow, for once reason prevails! And for all you lemmings who feel compelled to jump on asphalt without planning, too bad! Thank God that Camp Pendleton exists, or what's left of what we cherish about San Diego Co. would be history (check out the aerial photo of the border between San Clemente and Pendleton)! How about developing an offshore shuttle/ferry service which travels up and down the coast? Think out of the box, petrol-morons!
Bo wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:57 AM:I have to agree with Rich. I drive to Orange County and LA about three times a month for work, usually during the peak of the morning and evening rushes. Going north in the morning the back-up usually starts around Hwy 73, and is occasionally as far south as the hills / curves at the north end of San Clemente. Coming south in the evening the jams usually end in the same stretch of road. And of course farther to the north Hwy 5 and Hwy 405 are pretty much a mess around-the-clock. Overall, the stretch of road between Oceanside and San Juan Capistrano is the least congested and most pleasurable part of driving the San Diego to Orange County corridor. Dumping another freeway onto I-5 at San Clemente will change that forever! Why should we give up our precious public coast land and uncongested highway just so the Orange County Elite can get around a couple of minutes quicker?
To to Bo wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:06 AM:Who said anything about dictating professions and driving distances? Whatever happened to being responsible for your own choices? If you choose to live in Orange County and that means your stuck in traffic ever day, live with it! Don't expect the citizens of San Diego County to give up the last of our coastal nature preserves / recreational areas so you can plow a road though it and than charge us to use the road! Nuts to ya!
O'side Res wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:12 AM:To "To Bad", maybe you should move closer to your work or find a job closer to home. Maybe work near the Metrolink stations. Changes by people like you can reduce traffic, oil dependency, polution, stress on you and your family. The only one's supporting the toll road were bought off. We need to change our ways on everything you lumped together in one statement.
To Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:13 AM:Yep, taking PUBLIC land away and then using monetary barriers to deny access by the general PUBLIC to that PUBLIC land is the American way!
james wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:35 AM:Thank goodness the coastal commission has fiullfilled their responsibility. Now is the time to make progress and invest in flying cars not highways. Three dimensional highways in the sky are the future of mankind. Hopefully endangered flying species will not foil our plans to travel like the Jettsons.
Chase wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:47 AM:Being from a California founding family, I think it is sad that we now run things by feelings instead of reason. We need the new infrastructure or we need to drive all the illegals and all that were not born here back to their own countries like Arizona to Maine and block out borders. This is the same insanity that throws our children away over foreign oil and yet we stand on great reverves below our feet and refuse to drill. Eventualy our insanity will bring us low.
Cal wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:56 AM:Mother nature wins a small victory. Maybe there is a god afterall.
Ding Dong wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:57 AM:The Road Witch is DEAD.
just wait wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:58 AM:in another 40 years we will be terrified by the on coming ice age. oh, wait! The same enviro-... who in the 60's and 70's said the world was going to be covered in ice within 50 years because of the evil republicans and selfish people are now saying global warming will destroy us.the winners are the "shadow democrat" companies who will be making millions upon millions of dollars to "protect us". everything we do about global warming is useless unless the enviro-nazis go after the real destroyers of the planet re:third world countries and CHINA(pollutes more in one day than the US could in 2 months, coal powers 80% of china's industries.)but it's eaiser to blame Bush and put your heads in the sand than to put blame on the true culprits and try to make the world cleaner.we live in the US but we share the same air as china or did you enviro-nazis forget that.
Enviro, hippie, bizman wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:00 PM:I think we have a BINGO here!!!!! Thanks you CC!!!Wooo-hooo! :-) :D :o)
To Stay Home wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:24 PM:We tried the Ferry idea! Granted, it ran from Oceanside to San Diego. But it proved that such and idea is NOT economical nor does it save any time for commuters. Such would not serve any real function if trversing north verses south. It would stil not be capable of moving enough people at a reasonable price as far and as fast as a road!
Close I-5 wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:31 PM:Hey, we don't really need all those people coming into San Diego County anyway! Just Close I-5, I-15, and I-8. We already have Border check Points in place on each of these roads. So, since we really aren't part of CA or the USA (got to go through a chekc point to get in or out of SD County no matter which direction you drive), we might as well just shut the doors and roads to all those poel who keep trying to come down here and mess up our nice quiet little County! Besides, there would be more Avocados for us that way!
Termin-8-ed wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:34 PM:In the words of Arnold... Hasta la vista baby. Thank you CC and everyone who fought the good fight.
Jobs wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:35 PM:Testimony was given that widening I-5 would result in 42, 000 jobs. The toll road proponents flat out lied to their paid union members in the audience when they didn't tell them there would be more jobs on that project..a lot more jobs.
Can't happen wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:37 PM:We should never give publics lands away to private business. We already have enough of the corporate/military machine that owns most of our country and politicians. Thank god for the 8 Coastal Commissioners who understand that they are stewards of public lands and do not work for private developers. This was a triumph and as Peter Douglas said, a chance to make history and leave something for our grandchildren to enjoy.
Curious wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:50 PM:I'm curious about the poster Environmental Blindness references to TRW. I thought San Mateo Creek came out of the foothills of Camp Pendleton. If it were true that there are pollutants in the stream I would have thought that would have come up in the staff reports, etc. I wholeheartedly agree with the poster who said we can always adapt the way we travel. Metrolink is cheap and fun. C-1
My Hero wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:24 PM:Executive Director Douglas said the proposed toll road clearly fails to meet many policies that govern development along the coast.
"This toll road project is not only inconsistent with the law, it also raises fundamental questions about what kind of environmental and social future we want for our coastal communities, our families, our children and theirs," Douglas said.
He is my hero. He should be yours too.
mark wrote on Feb 7, 2008 2:02 PM:This toll road proposal always was a solution in search of a problem. Compared to the Orange County Los Angeles border and the Orange County Riverside border there is next to no commuter traffic crossing the 27 mile Camp Pendleton Marine base. This toll road was nothing more than a way for developers to begin encroaching on the Marine base nothing more.
Richard wrote on Feb 7, 2008 2:22 PM:Everyone is blaming liberals and democrats because they didnt get their road. Well, I say it is the fault of the Republicans in Orange County that did not have the foresight to leave any room on the maps for freeways and infrastructure. They screw up by pandering to the developers and right wing nuts in the OC but then they expect San Diego to give up its parkland. To all you fools in the OC, try electing some people up there that can think beyond their tax return.
TRUE BLUE wrote on Feb 7, 2008 2:44 PM:This isn't over. The Agency and other interested parties will now file suit in Superior Court asking that this unfounded decision of the Coastal Commission be set aside. The Coastal Commission is highly political with members being appointed as political patronage. They caved in to a tiny, noisy minority and did not decide in the best interests of all the citizens. Their decision will fall, as have many of their decisions in the past.
Stella wrote on Feb 7, 2008 2:57 PM:Thanks Coastal Commision for putting the dogs back on the leash.
charmaine wrote on Feb 7, 2008 3:02 PM:Let's CLARIFY a few issues for the poor readers who think visionary thinking limits progress:
RE CONGESTION: With only 4 lanes, the 241 toll road is simply not going to be able to carry the massive flow of cars that would truly make a dent in traffic on the 5. Furthermore, it would push more cars into an area of the 5 that has choke points both to the north in San Clemente and to the south in Oceanside because the number of lanes on the 5 are reduced. The idea that this toll road is the magic formula wipe out our traffic woes is IGNORANT and MISINFORMED.
RE OPPONENTS OF THE 241: Contrary to what all the OC officials would have the public believe, the people who oppose this project are not just slacker surfers and privileged San Clemente residents who are on a mission to keep the rest of California off their beaches. The people who are opposed to this project are hard working people who believe that a STATE PARK is off-limits to private enterprise and who believe that our coast should not be compromised so that a destructive highway, which will NOT RELIEVE TRAFFIC OR GET YOU TO JOHNNY'S SOCCER GAME any sooner, can be built. The people who showed up yesterday believed so passionately in the importance of preserving our state park that they took time off work (which, for many, was a risk) and traveled from Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, etc. It's an insult to all Californians who believe in the sanctity of the state park system and the importance of preserving sacred land for our Native Americans to suggest that this issue appeals only to surfers and San Clemente residents.
RE COASTAL ACCESS: Enough of the boo-hoo'ing from all the folks who claimed that there isn't enough access to the coast for inland folks - the 55, 405, 5, 133, 74 in OC and the 76, 78, 8, 15, etc. are all arteries that connect people to the coast. And exactly how does a road which can only be accessed by those who can afford to pay a hefty toll going to provide balanced coastal access?
RE WIDENING THE 5: It's time to stop thinking we can just keep building highways and start demanding that our transportation officials expand their vision and work to get people moving with fewer cars and obstacles. The idea that the only solution is the 241 shows just how little imagination and vision our leaders and the people who blindly follow them have.
The bottom line is that a lot of people have been duped by all the propaganda put forth by the TCA and the elected officials. But our Coastal Commission did their homework and voted with integrity. I have never been infused with more hope for our beautiful state than I am by this momentous decision. The people of California should be proud.
not a sucker wrote on Feb 7, 2008 3:18 PM:TO KIND OF FUNNY - What the hell would you know about what we opponents do for a living or how we spend our time? If you're willing to make sweeping judgments about what kind of people we are by the way dressed at the meeting, you are obviously incapable of deep thought. Good thing I'm not such a victim of visual stereotypes or I would have to say you lot in the business suits looked like a bunch of uptight, yes-men with dollar signs dancing in your heads. And incidentally, underneath those blue t-shirts were many successful people who own companies (like myself), manage businesses, work full-time in various occupations, artists, scientists, etc. Don't judge a book by its cover because that's how you lost this phase of the battle in the first place.
True Blue 2 wrote on Feb 7, 2008 3:19 PM:Don't hold your breath buddy or you will turn true blue.
Stay Home or? wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:02 PM:We better come up with some alternative ideas about how to move people from one place to another and not continue to believe that more roads are the answer. The sheer number of people in the future will make the automobile and highways obsolete as the preferred mode of travel. We may find that when given no other choice but to mothball the family vehicle(s), ideas that are often discounted (ie, offshore shuttle), will be ressurected.
Concerned-1 wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:18 PM:It is true that it's hard to find the truth when there's so much hype being flung around. In this case, I believe the Coastal Commission found the truth and they made the right decision.
You Chose it! wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:27 PM:You chose to live an unreasonable distance from your work place. You knew in doing that you would spend hours in your daily comute, spend a fortune on gas, and miss your child's soccer games, a great deal of their lives as well. For whatever reason, YOU made that decision. Some of us value our environment, our beaches and parks and our families more than the giant money grab game you signed up for. We'll keep our parks and beaches, and you can live with your decisions. If you don't like the comute, work where you live! It's quite simple really
Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:30 PM:It is easy and useful to stereotype. When is the last time you saw a successful businessman with a scraggly beard, ponytail, and saying for sure and dude all the time? Smoking dope also doesn't get you far in the real economy. Based on the unwashed multitudes celebrating their second Woodstock yesterday, I beg to differ about how bad or negative stereotypes are. Uneducated leeches have no right to input on matters of public concern.
Michael B. wrote on Feb 7, 2008 4:51 PM:I will add to this, and try to make something very clear. SR-241 would not have benefited anyone except those in Rancho Santa Margarita, Coto De Caza, eastern Mission Viejo, and anywhere else east of I-5 north of the OC/SD Co. Line. This was not a "bypass" of I-5, it doesn't even reconnect with it. All it does it make travel (commuting) from those areas mentioned to San Diego easier for a few miles. It would add traffic to I-5 south of there, with no mitigation. It would open more areas to development, negating the traffic benefit. This wasn't a freeway completing a useful network, this was for the benefit of a few. The days of long auto commutes are slowly coming to a close, as cheap energy goes away. It is unsustainable. So, thank you Coastal Commission. It is for projects like these that you were created in the first place!
ARGH! wrote on Feb 7, 2008 5:09 PM:Rand - you are wrong. Paul McCartney is the richest pot smoker I know of - but there are plenty of others including Mayor Mike Bloomberg of NYC. And don't forget Arnold. Your comment at 4:30 pm is rude and elitist. You lost - don't be sore - get over it.
TCA not so appealing wrote on Feb 7, 2008 5:13 PM:The road is DOA. But zombies are trying to breath life back into the beast. The big orange is appealing to the US Commerce Dept. Better hurry before the pro-road Bush regime is swept away in the fall elections.
To Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 5:25 PM:Well, Keith Richards comes to mind. He's worth hundreds of millions. Bob Dylan is another one. How about Richard Branson - he owns among other things an airline and is trying to develop bio-jetfuel! How about Johnny Dep? or Jerry Brown? As for the "dude" speech, John Seversen, Bob McKnight, Yvon Chouinard, Greg Noll, Gerry Lopez, and Shaun Thompson are all successful buisnessmen that include "dude" in their vocabulary. Rand, go back to reading your book -Fountainhead, right?
Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 5:44 PM:Keith Richards is a poster child of what we saw at the hearing yesterday. Glad to hear from "To Rand" that he is indeed a role model.
Tanks wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:01 PM:Tanks, light armored vehicles, helicopters, artillery, and jets are what's wrecking the enviornment in that area. Surfers are notorious for not having jobs, it's in the culture. The military builds pretty much whatever it wants wherever it wants. They have some trumped up enviornmental study done, tweak the results, and build anyway. A road is the least of the worries there.
to rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:08 PM:"It is easy and useful to stereotype"? Where did you learn that kind of unenlightened thinking? Working for the TCA? Or serving as an elected official in Orange County? Stereotype all you want - the more ammunition you give us with which to fight your foolishness, the better. But those so-called "unwashed", "uneducated leeches", whose right to free speech you would deny based on your ignorant stereotyping, were far more articulate and informed than all the suits testifying on behalf of the 241 because what they chose to speak was the truth.
GET A JOB RAND wrote on Feb 7, 2008 6:25 PM:It's exactly this kind of selective thinking that's wrong with everyone who is promoting the 241 extension. "To Rand" didn't say Keith Richards was a role model; furthermore, he went on to list a lot of other people who defy the stereotype you would use to petulantly describe your opponents. You chose to ignore the meaning of his message and take this out of context to support your platform, which is exactly the kind of faulty reasoning behind your support of the toll road.If you would resort to the kind of bratty, snarky name-calling that tainted many of the Yes241 supporters' comments yesterday rather than debate the facts in an intelligent and informed manner, then how can we trust YOU to weigh in on such important matters as the construction of this destructive and ineffective toll road?
THANK YOU, CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSIONER AND ALL OF THE "UNWASHED" WHO SHOWED UP TO YESTERDAY'S MEETING TO PROTECT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES!
Poor Rand wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:11 PM:Are you the guy who does the atlas with McNally? Did you already have the new map drawn up with a toll road on it? Bummer dude.
DaveS wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:30 PM:It is wonderful, that we are able to save this last great stretch of southern california beach.... I have spent many a year surfing these spots, and was truly worried that big business would come out on top... But thans to the commission, our voices were heard.... As surfers, and Californians we must take every fight like this one to the point of victory, there is no more need for the machine to destroy what we all hold so dear to our hearts.... Now its time to go surfing. Aloha, & Mahalo.
TO NOT A REAL VOTE wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:53 PM:Uh, nice generalization based on little understanding of the facts. I live in Los Angeles and have a business which takes me all over Southern California, so I sit in my fair share of bad traffic. I hate traffic as much as the next person but you are mistaken if you think this toll road would have helped you complain less about it. If you hate traffic that much, try getting a place near your work. Or ask your local city council to stop granting favors to developers who would pack us all in like sardines while laughing all the way to the bank.
Rand Has No Soul wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:04 PM:Offer something constructive, why don't you, instead of all your bitter hate and prejudice. And keep in mind that, if it weren't for all the "enviro-freaks" and those "undemocratic" Coastal Commissioners, who work to defend us against little things like, oh, air pollution and water contamination, you'd probably be breathing out of a respirator right now and drinking DDT with your Starbucks.
To BUD wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:14 PM:What do Republicans and Democrats have to do with this issue? And why do you think you are so important that only your hard work makes this country go? If anything, you are hindering the progress of this country by choosing to work miles away from your home. Sheesh. I didn't even go to the meeting but if I had to choose sides based on the comments here, I would definitely stand behind the "hippies" - at least they have some integrity.
Rediculous wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:15 PM:I can't believe all the people who care more for a toad than they do for congestion and the rest of the environment. Think about all the pollution caused by all of the vehicles sitting in traffic, not to mention the time lost by all who travel that strecth of freeway and the freeways into Orange County. This would have not only relieved congestion in San Clement but all the way northbound on the 5, by allowing commuters to travel inland to other areas connecting to the 91 and beyond. Another example of how a bunch of tree huggers and toad lovers can mess things up for everyone else. I hope everyone is happy in another 10-15 years when the Rancho Mission Viejo company develops all the land near Ladera Ranch and adds thousands of new homes as well as thousand of more commuters. We will all be sitting in traffic even longer than we do now. And for what? To save a toad! Congratualtions on your victory, I hope you feel the same way in a few years.
The correct decision wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:43 PM:I agree that traffic will get worse without transportation improvements, but the toll road was not the solution. I'm a Republican, but having lived in Southern California all my life, I have seen how almost all of the open space has been overrun with countless track homes and strip malls - the result of poor urban planning. The Marketing 101 people who think any business should be able to build whatever they want, whenever they want, should stop trying to bash people who want to keep some open space left. The 241 will foster more development and more traffic in the long term, so in 30 years some other agency will push for some other freeway to alleviate traffic on the 241, and will lobby to push it through some other park.. provided there is one left. However, the fight is not finished as the Toll Road agency is going to bypass the Coastal Commission and get the Dept. of Commerce to push it through.
janet wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:56 PM:Some people can't get through their heads that it is not the toads or the rats but PEOPLE's general desire to be able to enjoy nature. Some want to take all that away from us, everything we love about San Diego. We are people, too, and we don't want a tollroad through our lovely park. Really, the reason the lanes have to be so wide is that they have to accomodate hummers and huge SUVs. I can't go many places that I don't see 1 1/2 parking places taken up by behemoths. Next, they'll be demanding all the parks be turned into parking lots with larger spaces.
State parks are NOT for sale! wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:48 PM:The corporate goons over at the TCA must be really slow learners. The poor bums seem to have an incredibly difficult time grasping a relatively simple concept: That the majority of Southern CA doesn't want to cover a state park with concrete simply to help the TCA get rich! What's that you say? You mean the citizens of CA don't want to destroy one of the state's best parks just so a private toll road agency can build their road-for-profit, one which traffic studies have shown will do nothing to help congestion on the I-5 anyway? Nope, we sure don't! Gee, imagine that. Haha! Oh, to be a fly on the wall at TCA headquarters right now...
Anyhow, the people have spoken, and the Coastal Commission had the resolve, strength, and foresight to make the RIGHT decision. THANK YOU, California Coastal Commission!
I surf, I work, I vote wrote on Feb 8, 2008 6:32 AM:San Onofre is the heart of the multi-billion dollar surf and action sports industry. That's right, I said billion. What the TCA pundits don't want you to know is that many of the protesters live in the neighborhoods the toll road would link to.
Happy wrote on Feb 8, 2008 3:36 PM:I went to the first part of the meeting; I took a shower first, though. The people opposing the Toll Road far outnumbered those who favored it. As far as the bitter comments, here, the name calling and arrogance, this truly appears to be a case of sour grapes.
The Dept. Of Commerce will not approve this, either. I too am grateful to the Coastal Commissioners, to CC Staff, who made a great presentation, and to all of the people who came, opposing the toll road, which would have been another taxpayer subsidy to developers, plain and simple.
Dirty tricksters work these blogs to discourage, discredit and to divide and separate. These meanspirited tactics are not working. The victory for our park, for Trestles, is inspiring. Thank you, everyone who participated, who is honest, and who cares about our quality of life and that of future generations.
Jon wrote on Feb 9, 2008 1:26 PM:A rare and wonderful victory for reason in the face of lies, big money and ignorance. To all the right wing screechers who posted here, sorry you don't get a new road where you can act out your rage, but you can always sit in your car in your driveway to fume and vent while listening to the latest talk radio hate monger.
TiKiMaTT wrote on Feb 10, 2008 7:50 AM:The fight of traffic congestion is not over. The time has come for forward progressive thinking with reguards to future transportation. The opponents of this project will now set their sights on solutions to the commute by way of conveinent mass transit. It's obvious that those presently holding positions of power lack the wear with all to bring us into the 21st century. It is those people that railed against this project who will take the reigns and bring southern california's transportaion solutions to fruition by way of mass transit systems. These are systems that all can use and not just a minority. This will take decades to accomplish, but this is the legacy we will leave future generations.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.