Northern Calif. Dem unable to control OC Toll Road
Posted by: Theodore Judah | 04/29/2007 5:15 PM
Like Sheila Kuehl and Tom Hayden before him, Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) made a failed effort to pass leglislation in Sacramento that would stop Orange County from connecting the 241 to the I-5.
As the LA Times reported today, his anti-241 completion bill - AB1457 - was shelved in the hopes that he can gain support next year. But while the GOP remains unified in opposition to his pro-traffic congestion bill, even his own party is split on whether this flawed legislation that lets the State Parks Director have veto power over traffic relief options is a good idea or not.
The 241 completion has the support of business, nearly every OC city and elected official, the state GOP, and importantly, the labor unions. Thanks to the unions, when the California State Democratic Party gathered in San Diego this weekend, their resolution opposing this traffic relief project included a caveat that indicated that traffic relief and park enhancements would be the preferred alternative. Their resolution of opposition includes the following phrase: "unless there is significant enough mitigation that a consensus of support for the project would exist with local elected officials, the State Coastal Commission and local environmental groups.”
Traffic congestion on the I-5 in San Clemente and on South Orange County's city streets don't impact Assemblyman Huffman, so he has no qualms about trying to pass legislation that would stop the completion of the 241 roadway.
Huffman's bill says that the state parks director should be able to veto any road projects that go in or even near a park. Ironically enough, in his hometown district, China Camp State Park has a road that runs right through it. For some reason, however, his legislation would not require the road running through the park in his district to close. Hmmm.
Orange County Business Council CEO Lucy Dunn put it best:
"What makes me particularly crazy is that this road has gone through 20 years of planning and compromises with agencies and transporation officials here in Orange County and here's this out-of-towner trying to take away our local control."
It's not stunning that this bill was defeated... every other similar bill was too. What is stunning is that it didn't even get out of committee.
Mr. Ayer registered as a Republican to be electable in an interim election with no incumbents. He did...
I'm extremely glad to hear this news. It's one step in the right direction. Residents of Rancho Santa Margarita and surrounding communities have been expecting the completion of this toll road for years. News of the defeat of AB1457 will bring smiles to my community.
Since when are "locals" allowed to destroy resources that belong to the whole state? TCA has overstepped its bounds and needs to be reeled in. I-5 is going to be widened eventually anyways, why not do it now when it's cheaper (remember the non-compete clause?)and won't destroy a public resource??
Okay Joe... You come up with the $2.5 billion it's going to cost to widen the I-5, then you tell the 1,000 plus residents and businesses that their homes and offices need to be plowed under to widen the I-5.
The fact of the matter is, there is NO money in Measure M or any of the state bond measures to pay for I-5 widening. And no political will to bulldoze hundreds of homes and businesses.
And by the way, the land DOESN'T belong to the state, it belongs to the U.S. Marine Corps, and they are okay with that route that connects the 241 to the I-5.
And your "public resource" is a LEASED state park that the state won't even be able to afford once the lease expires (they'd have to pay market value for the land... no more "$1 a year lease").
Tick-tock Joe... The Inland portion of the state park is going away with or without Foothill-South.
Wow, drinking the TCA koolaid again are ya? I guess you haven't seen OCTA's data showing that I-5 will be gridlock by 2030 with or without the tollroad. What do you think they'll do to fix that? Hmmm, maybe widen the 5? The 241 won't even put a dent in the traffic, it's a road to nowhere.
The reason there's no money is because the TCA has everyone fooled into believing that the 241 is THE ANSWER. Maybe if the decision makers would allow a true and fair analysis of the best way to relieve traffic on I-5, we could get everyone out of traffic, not just those able to afford $12 tolls.
And what makes you think the State would have to pay "fair market value" for the land? The marines have no intention of forcing the state park out, they would get slayed in the public view, meaning their bosses in Congress won't let it happen whether Blue or Red...
Good luck trying to convince people that connecting an highway to the I-5 would not relieve traffic congestion. You've gone beyond KoolAid with that argument.
OCTA reaffirmed their support of Foothill-South just this year and they assume its completion when doing traffic modeling.
Should a traffic accident close I-5 near the county line, there are no alternative routes. It doesn't matter how wide I-5 is if an accident shuts it down.
No one ever claimed completing the 241 would be THE ANSWER, but it would be AN answer. And study after study, including OCTA's, shows that Foothill-South would relieve traffic congestion.
Be honest Joe, you don't want the 241 completed because either:
1) You don't want "909ers" coming to "your" beach or
2) You think that if traffic gets bad enough people will be forced to take trains and busses... the enviro panacea.
We need traffic relief now... Completing the 241 will help get us there.
Again, just look at the data. TCA tells you that no homes will ever be taken if we build the 241. Wrong. It'll just be a little longer because Caltrans' hands are tied due to the non-compete clause.
The 241 buys us 20 years of traffic relief... and takes NO homes. This is a good thing.