More L.A. and Orange County news...

Catching up on L.A. and Orange county Environmental Issues from the Sierra Club website

BALLONA WETLANDS:

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/08/investigation_underway_over_drainage_system_ballona_reserve

WHITTIER/PUENTE HILLS:

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/09/club_opposes_drilling_plan_land_whittier_set_aside_parkland

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/11/activists_score_key_victory_whittier_drilling

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/11/puente_hills_landfill_closed_good

SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS:

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/05/new_and_better_plan_protect_santa_monica_mountains

SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS/ANGELES NATIONAL FOREST:

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/08/will_obama_create_san_gabriels_national_monument

ORANGE COUNTY:

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/07/orange_county_toll_road_plan_stopped_again

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/08/court_says_saddle_crest_housing_plan_oc_no_go

http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2013/12/activists_halt_newport_beach_housing_proposal

just a little more!....it won't hurt...

South Orange County Toll road backers try the incremental approach

--the last 16 mile plan cutting through a state park was rejected by CA and Bush administrations
--Now, road pavers seek to extend the tollroad-freeway 5 miles to the Ortega Highway, 11 miles shy of the original planned connection to the 5 freeway.


Full 11/7/2011 story is at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-toll-expansion-20111107,0,7662009.story

"Many residents who live where the 241 now ends say they support extending the tollway to San Onofre, but with that old plan shelved, the toll road agency is looking at a shorter extension..."

-
Failed Toll Road Experiment in Orange County is Subject of New Blog's Investigative Series

http://www.ocprogressive.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=11

1/27/2009--The private Orange County Toll Road experiment now has enough history to be deemed a failure. An examination of the quasi-private toll roads in Orange County shows that toll roads are not a cost-effective way of delivering roads to the Orange County driving public.

Of the four authorized toll road projects, one was never built, one was bought out by the government, one cannot be completed, and the worst one is now insolvent and headed for bankruptcy...

-

Bush Administration Rejects Orange County/San Diego Border Toll Road Agency Appeal!
12/18/2008

Dear Friend of the Coast,

We did it!!!

After ten years of fighting the Transportation Corridor Agencies' (TCA) proposal to construct a 16-mile toll road at San Onofre State Beach, we can now celebrate a tremendous environmental victory. As it turns out, even the Bush administation's Commerce Department does not buy the TCA's empty arguments supporting the toll road; evidently, nobody besides the TCA believes the proposed road is vital to national security and the only viable transportation alternative.
I would like to take this opportunity and thank you all for years of the hard work, the commitment and the belief necessary for an organized community passionate about its environment to defeat an agency willing to spend such inordinate amounts of money to get what they want. This time, because of you, we can celebrate a victory for San Onofre State Park--a Californian jewel.

Unless the TCA keeps flailing for any rationale supporting their toll road and finds someone besides themselves supporting their proposal, this rejection from the Bush Administration seems to be the final blow to TCA's scheme to replace San Onofre State Beach with a toll road. Congratulations!!

Click here to read the Los Angeles Times article!
Click here to read the Orange County Register's article! http://greenoc.freedomblogging.com/2008/12/18/feds-uphold-state-decision-foothill-south-toll-road-dead/2382/

To read the Commerce Department's report (NOTE--LARGE FILE) : http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/images/TCA%20decision.pdf

The Sierra Club thanks our partners in the Save the San Onofre Coalition and Save Panhe Coalition whose help was invaluable in achieving this victory. California State Parks Foundation, Surfrider Foundation, NRDC, Endangered Habitats League, Audubon Society, Wildcoast, and so many more organizations and individuals who worked together to help ensure the San Mateo Campground, Trestles Beach and the San Mateo Watershed remain pristine for future generations to enjoy.

In solidarity, and with immense gratitude,

Mark Massara, Sierra Club Coastal Program

---------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Commerce Department rejects Foothill South toll road

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/12/tollroad.html
L.A. Times, 10:03 AM, December 18, 2008

The controversial Foothill South toll road, proposed to connect south Orange County with north San Diego County, was handed a major blow this morning when the U.S. Commerce Department announced it would uphold the state Coastal Commission's rejection of the plan.
Federal officials could only override the state's decision if the project had no alternatives or was necessary to national security, and the announcement this morning said neither of those criteria was met.

Today's decision is another -- and perhaps fatal -- setback for the proposed 16-mile turnpike, which had been blasted by environmentalists for cutting through a popular beachfront state park and lauded by transportation planners as vital to easing the region's gridlock.
The California Coastal Commission rejected plans for the road earlier this year, saying that the six-lane road -- which would run from Rancho Santa Margarita to Basilone Road at Camp Pendleton -- violated the state's coastal management program.

The toll road agency backing the plan "may pursue another route" consistent with coastal zone protections, according to the Commerce Department announcement. Since 1972, the department has ruled on 43 such appeals of state coastal zone decisions, overriding 14.
-- Susannah Rosenblatt

----------------------------------
Department of Commerce Rules on Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency Consistency Appeal
December 18, 2008

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20081218_tca.html

The Department of Commerce today upheld the California Coastal Commission’s objection to a proposal to construct a 16-mile toll road connecting California state Route 241 to Interstate 5 in southern Orange and northern San Diego counties.The commission objected to the proposed project under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act on the grounds that the toll road was not consistent with the state’s coastal zone management program. Under the CZMA, federal agencies may not issue any permits required for a project if a state has objected, unless the Department of Commerce, on appeal, overrides the objection.

The Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency appealed the commission’s objection to the Department of Commerce in February, triggering an administrative review process that involved written briefs and arguments by the parties, input from interested federal agencies, tens of thousands of written comments from the public, and a 10-hour public hearing in San Diego County.

Under the CZMA, the department may override an objection only if no reasonable alternative to the project exists and the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the CZMA, or if the project is necessary in the interest of national security. The department determined that there is at least one reasonable alternative to the project. The department also found that the project is not necessary in the interest of national security.

TCA may pursue another route for its proposed toll road that the commission determines is consistent with California’s coastal zone management program, and TCA is not limited to the alternative proposal described in the department’s decision.

Since the enactment of the CZMA in 1972, the department has acted on 43 appeals, upholding 29 objections by state agencies and overriding 14.

Toll Road Backers Still Trying to Resurrect the Rejected State Park Superhighway!

http://www.savesanonofre.com

The Department of Commerce's September 22 public hearing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds on the Toll Road is approaching quickly and the deadline for requests to speak is September 12. Somewhat peculiar to this hearing is the requirement that a physical copy of your request must be mailed to the Department of Commerce. We encourage you to send in your request to speak by the end of this week in order to allow sufficient time for the request to arrive. Make sure that your request contains your Name and Address. Send your request to the following address:

Thomas Street, NOAA Office
of General Counsel for Ocean Services
1305 East- West Highway, Room 6111
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Alternatively, you may email your Name and Address to marty@savesanonofre.com by Sept. 7 and we will send your request for you.

Awareness Demonstrations

It is imperative that we generate a strong presence of opposition to the Toll Road for the 9/22 hearing. As such, we will be taking to the streets to bring attention, and attendance, to the coming hearing. At these demonstrations, we will be waving signs, holding surfboards, and constructing miniature plastic tents to emphasize the harm to the camping and surfing experience that would be wrought by the proposed Toll Road. We'll bring the supplies. All we need is your exuberance.

September 7th @11am: Pico Ave, near Interstate 5, in San Clemente, CA

Meet us at Staples parking lot in San Clemente at 11am.
93 Via Pico Plaza San Clemente, CA 92672
Get Directions

September 21st @ 9am: San Elijo Ave and Chesterfield Dr. in Cardiff, CA

Meet at the corner near the Patagonia Store
2185 San Elijo Ave Cardiff by the Sea, CA 92007
Get Directions

Regards,

Save San Onofre
Protect California's Parks & Beaches

-------------------
more info:
http://www.coastkeeper.org/coastkeeper/work/projects/toll-road.asp

-----

South Orange County Toll Road Backers Get New Hearing Before the Feds

In May, the Department of Commerce – despite TCA pleas to the contrary - announced that it would hold a Public Hearing on the toll road agency’s appeal to override the California Coastal Commission's rejection of the 241 Toll Road through San Onofre State Beach.

We have just received word that the Department of Commerce will hold its Public Hearing in the TCA's appeal of the Coastal Commission’s on July 24 and/or 25 at UC Irvine’s Bren Events Center.

At the Coastal Commission meeting in February, you all helped us make a resounding statement against the Toll Road… and your voices were critical then in convincing the Coastal Commission to decide against the Toll Road.

Now we need to do it again – but even bigger this time!

Please make plans to attend the hearing at UC Irvine with your friends and family and stand up for San Onofre, for state parks, and against the Toll Road.

We will let you know as soon as we have more specific information on the time, location, and details of the hearing.

Remember – Save the Park… Stop the Toll Road!
Regards,
Save San OnofreProtect California's Parks & Beaches
P.S. There will be a guided hike of the San Onofre area on June 28th at 10:30am. We will meet at the Trestles Beach Parking Lot at El Camino Real and Cristianitos. Email SSekich@surfrider.org or Marty@savesanonofre.com to RSVP.


MORE INFO:

Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi's letter of opposition:
http://www.ltg.ca.gov/images//toll%20road%20letter%20luxton%206-11-08.pdf

http://www.coastkeeper.org/coastkeeper/work/projects/toll-road.asp

Army engineers criticize South Orange County tollroad agency

Part of toll road agency's Foothill South appeal is inaccurate, Army Corps of Engineers says. TCA officials may seek a retraction.

By David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 15, 2008

In a strong rebuke by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the agency proposing a toll road through San Onofre State Beach has been accused of making false and misleading statements in an appeal to federal officials.

Col. Thomas H. Magness, the corps' district director in Los Angeles, charged in a letter last week that the appeal by Irvine-based Transportation Corridor Agencies challenging the project's denial by the state Coastal Commission contains false statements and mischaracterizes the Army's role in the planning process.

"I am compelled to highlight a few areas of the public record where I have found inaccurate statements as well as inferences that misrepresent the Corps' preliminary determinations," Magness wrote to the U.S. Department of Commerce, which will rule on the appeal.

TCA officials angrily denied the allegations and may demand a retraction.

The six-page letter, experts suggest, could weaken the transit agency's position by, among other things, calling into question the selection of the so-called Green Alignment that would cut through the state beach.

Contrary to the TCA's appeal, Magness wrote, the corps has "at no time" ruled out other, less controversial routes.

"It's significant for the corps to weigh in that way," said Deborah A. Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law School. Not usually known to be proactive, she said, the corps -- judging from the tone of its letter -- is sensitive to the TCA's use of its name.

Brian Segee, a staff attorney for the Washington, D.C.-based Defenders of Wildlife, which opposes the toll road, agreed. "For the corps to go on record like this, and directly contradict the TCA and say outright that they believe there are practical alternatives, absolutely undermines the TCA's appeal," he said.

TCA directors defended their agency's appeal and planning process, saying they were stunned by the corps' letter and its tone.

The communication prompted an angry call to Magness from Thomas Margro, the toll road agency's chief executive. The corps' letter, Margro said in an interview, makes it sound as if the TCA approved the route "in the dead of night," when, in fact, the action was known by all participants, including the corps.

TCA Director Jerry Amante said that after reading both the TCA's appeal and Magness' letter, he had concluded "there's nothing misleading in the appeal" and predicted the federal government would react favorably to it.

At an estimated cost of $875 million, the proposed Foothill South would be the final link in Orange County's network of toll roads. It would run 16 miles from Oso Parkway in Rancho Santa Margarita to Interstate 5 at Basilone Road, south of San Clemente.

Although opponents say it would destroy a popular state park, proponents say the road is needed to help alleviate congestion on I-5 and thoroughfares in southern Orange County.

The route was selected after being reviewed by a collaborative -- a term coined by the TCA -- including the Navy, Federal Highway Administration and the corps. But the TCA's description of the corps as part of a group that excluded alternative alignments was false, Magness wrote; the engineers provided only a preliminary opinion, making no assertion that other toll road routes were impractical.

"We find that lots of folks try to spin things to help their argument," said David J. Castanon, chief of the corps' regulatory division in Los Angeles. "Our role is to help cut through things . . . to find out what really matters and to make a fair and balanced decision."

Amante disputed Magness' version of events, calling his letter "disingenuous."

"Let's be honest," he said. "The letter was probably written as a result of pressure being put on the corps by environmentalists."

The corps' letter is part of a flurry of recent missives to the Commerce Department, including one from the TCA urging that no public hearing be held on its appeal to avoid a repetition of the "circus atmosphere" that occurred at the Coastal Commission's hearing. That lively February meeting drew a crowd of more than 3,500, the largest ever to attend a commission hearing. It concluded with commissioners voting 8 to 2 that the proposed Foothill South violated the California Coastal Act, which regulates development along the state's 1,100-mile shoreline.

In its letter, the TCA took exception, among other things, to the hearing's location at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, which, it said, is 50 miles from the proposed toll road, "a location calculated to maximize attendance by project opponents."

The Coastal Commission said the hearing was held at a mutually agreeable location and, for the most part, was civil and quiet.

The proposed toll road has also been the subject of intense political debate. Last month Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who supports the road, declined to renew the state Parks Commission terms of actor-director Clint Eastwood and Bobby Shriver, the governor's brother-in-law, both of whom oppose it.

And several state officials opposed to the road have urged the federal government to let the Coastal Commission's rejection of it stand.

-----
South Orange County Toll road may have life yet (??)

Orange County agency may appeal Coastal Commission's rejection

By Paul Sisson
North County Times
February 8, 2008

SAN ONOFRE ---- The battle over extending the Highway 241 toll road through San Onofre State Beach may not be over yet.

At 11:20 p.m. Wednesday, after 10 hours of passionate testimony, a crowd of more than 1,000 activists cheered victory as the California Coastal Commission voted 8-2 against the toll road, which they insisted would kill the Trestles surf break and blight a popular state park.

But the next morning, toll road officials said that they may exercise their right to appeal the commission's decision to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. The Cabinet official could overturn the commission's decision if he finds that the $875 million project is consistent with coastal development law.

However, toll road opponents said they were confident state law would still trump whatever the White House appointee decides.

Jennifer Seaton, a spokeswoman for the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, which is trying to build the new toll road to relieve congestion on Interstate 5 in Orange County, said Thursday that federal law allows an appeal within 30 days of the commission's decision, and that the agency's board would probably make a decision at its meeting next Thursday.

"No decision on an appeal has been made yet, but it is definitely something we're considering," Seaton said.

If the agency appeals, its opponents who prevailed Wednesday night vowed Thursday to rejoin the battle.

"We are going to be fighting for this park to keep it safe in perpetuity for the people of California," said James Birkelund, senior project attorney for the National Resources Defense Council, on behalf of the coalition of environmental agencies that opposed the toll road.

About four miles of the 16-mile toll road passes through the portion of San Onofre State Beach that runs inland from Interstate 5. Because the park is so close to the ocean, the Coastal Commission must find that the project is consistent with state and federal coastal development guidelines before the toll road agency can apply for a series of permits necessary for construction.

At Wednesday's meeting, held in Wyland Hall Pavilion at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, commissioners found that the project could harm various native plants and animals and could also stop pebbles from entering nearby San Mateo Creek. It's the pebbles, surfers said, that make the Trestles surf break one of the best in the state.

Seaton said the transportation agency disagrees with the Coastal Commission's ruling that the toll road is not consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Act, a federal law passed in 1972.

"We feel that the Coastal Commission has not considered the evidence," Seaton said. "If we appealed, we would probably be arguing that the project is consistent."

Anson Franklin, a spokesman for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, confirmed Thursday that Foothill/Eastern has the right to appeal the commission's decision.

Franklin said that the Coastal Zone Management Act gives the commerce secretary the ability, in certain circumstances, to override the Coastal Commission's decision that the toll road is inconsistent with coastal building requirements.

Those circumstances, Franklin said, include situations where the commerce secretary determines a project:

- "furthers the national interest in a significant and substantial manner;"

- "outweighs any adverse coastal effects;"

- has "no reasonable alternative available that would allow the activity to proceed consistent with the state program;" or

- is "necessary in the interest of national security."

And Franklin said that Gutierrez would look at the project on its own merits, rather than examining the Coastal Commission's decision.

"The secretary would evaluate the project that's appealed, rather than passing judgment on the objections of the state," Franklin said.

The "consistency determination" that the Coastal Commission voted against Wednesday was only the first round of approval for the toll road.

Seaton, the spokeswoman for the toll road agency, said that the project would still need a coastal development permit from the Coastal Commission even if an appeal is successful.

"We would definitely have to go to them again for a permit," she said.

Environmentalists who opposed the project said the toll road's progress would continue to be stopped by the Coastal Commission.

Birkelund said, "We believe that the Coastal Commission sent a clear message that running a toll road through a state park is inappropriate."

Despite the specter of an appeal, the grass-roots coalition of surfers, environmentalists and beach lovers that swarmed into the Wyland Hall Pavilion all day Wednesday was euphoric Thursday.

Marty Benson of Oceanside, a member of the Save San Onofre Coalition, which mobilized the opposition effort, said Thursday morning that he is still stoked about the victory.

"I still get shivers today when I think about it," Benson said. "I got choked up about 50 times yesterday."

He said the coalition plans to oppose any appeal.

"I will be there in opposition every step of the way," Benson said.

The Coastal Commission held the second day of its three-day meeting schedule at Oceanside City Hall on Thursday. Just after the commission broke for lunch, Chairman Patrick Kruer of Rancho Santa Fe said the overflow crowd at Wednesday's marathon meeting didn't sway the commissioners.

"It was not the numbers, not at all," Kruer said. "It was the facts that were presented."

Coastal Commission rejects Foothill South toll road

Late-night vote goes 8-2 against project as commissioners challenge road agency's science and finances.

Despite Governor Schwarzenegger's support of the toll road thru the state park, 3 of his 4 appointees voted against it, with 1 supporting it. All 4 appointees of the State Senate voted no, while the State Assembly speaker's appointees were split 1 yes, 1 no, and 2 absent.

After defeat, O.C. tollway officials consider new route

The California Coastal Commission rejected plans for an extension of the Foothill South highway through San Onofre State Beach.

By Dan Weikel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
3:42 PM PST, February 7, 2008

A day after their stinging defeat before the California Coastal Commission, Orange County toll road officials are considering a new route for a six-lane highway.

After 12 hours of public testimony and debate Wednesday, commissioners decided by an 8-2 vote that extending the Foothill South tollway through San Onofre State Beach would violate environmental laws designed to regulate development along 1,100 miles of California coastline.
"The news was disappointing," said Lance MacLean, chairman of the Transportation Corridor Agencies, which has spent years and tens of millions of dollars planning the Foothill South. "At the board's next meeting, we will brainstorm our options, which may include moving the route" of the highway.

Meanwhile, tollway opponents, heartened by the commission's decision, said the vote preserves the integrity of the California Coastal Act and sends a signal to private and public interests with plans underway to take state parkland for uses other than those originally intended.

"We absolutely think this is an important deterrent," said Elizabeth Goldstein, executive director of the State Parks Foundation, a toll road opponent. The decision "is a signal to those who want to use parkland for [something] which it is not intended and that they will face a hard road. These are not paths of least resistance."

The State Parks Foundation estimated last spring that there were 110 active or proposed development plans submitted by private and public interests that would encroach on 72 state parks. The plans include small takings of parkland by private property owners as well as for casinos, dairies, desalination plants, utility lines, streets and the now-rejected toll road.

Estimated to cost at least $875 million, the tollway would have run 16 miles from Oso Parkway in Rancho Santa Margarita to Interstate 5 at Basilone Road, south of San Clemente. It would have coursed through the northern half of San Onofre and passed over the Trestles marine nature preserve. About 320 of the park's 2,100 acres would have been taken for the road.

San Onofre's northern part contains endangered species, an unspoiled stretch of San Mateo Creek, the 161-space San Mateo Campground, and archaeological sites, such as the Juaneno Indian village of Panhe. The nearby beach is known for two famous surf spots, Trestles and Old Man's.

Transportation Corridor Agencies officials said the tollway was needed to accommodate development in south Orange County and to provide congestion relief on Interstate 5, the heaviest traveled corridor between Los Angeles and San Diego. No alternatives were available, they said, and steps would have been taken to protect San Onofre's environment.

But with its decision, the commission overwhelming sided with a staff recommendation to reject the project because the tollway would violate the California Coastal Act, which is designed to protect endangered species, wetlands, archaeological sites, public access and recreational resources.

"This project looks like something from the 1950s," said Commissioner Sara Wan of Malibu, who voted against the tollway. "Putting a massive project in an environmentally sensitive area -- it's inconceivable."

MacLean said the Transportation Corridor Agencies may appeal the decision to the U.S. secretary of commerce because federal law applies to San Onofre, which sits on land leased from the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps base. Commission officials say that since 1977, there have been more than a dozen such appeals, mostly by oil companies. About half of the decisions were overturned.

Sarah Christie, the Coastal Commission's legislative director, said the commerce secretary would have to find that the Foothill South route complies with the Coastal Act, a process that could take a year.

Even if the decision were overturned, Christie said, tollway officials would still need to obtain a development permit from the state, which would not be bound by the commerce secretary's decision.
Check out these links for some awesome coverage of yesterday's hearing:

-The LA Times (be sure to especially look for their gallery of photos from the hearing)

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tollway7feb07-pg,0,5194686.photogallery

-The San Diego Union Tribune

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20080207-9999-7n7toll1.html

-Surfer Magazine

http://surfermag.com/features/onlineexclusives/ccmeetingdelmar-02-07-2008/

By PAT BRENNAN and ELLYN PAK

THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

DEL MAR – The state Coastal Commission late Wednesday denied approval of the Foothill South toll road, delivering what could be the project’s fatal blow.

The 8-2 decision came after a 14-hour hearing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds at which more than 2,000 supporters and opponents gathered, chanting and carrying signs.

The 16-mile road would extend the 241 toll road through San Onofre State Beach park, habitat for a variety of threatened and endangered species, and pass within a few hundred feet of a popular campground.

Commissioners grilled representatives of the Foothill Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency about science, finances and other aspects of the toll road proposal.

The commission’s approval would have moved the tollway agency a step forward toward obtaining a number of additional approvals necessary before the road could be built.

The agency’s chief executive officer, Thomas E. Margro, said he will appeal the commission’s decision to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce.

“Many people support this project,” Margro said. “I thought we made a very strong case.”

The decision was announced at 11:19 p.m., and kicked off an impromptu celebration by whooping and hollering project opponents.

“This is an incredible moment,” said 35-year San Clemente resident Steve Netherby. “This is a moment we’ve been waiting for a decade. You can’t imagine the ecstasy we feel.”

One of the first signs of trouble came when Commissioner Sara Wan questioned the tollway agency’s data on the endangered Pacific pocket mouse, saying the agency had mischaracterized surveys of the mouse’s presence.

Coastal Commissioner Steve Blank also questioned tollway representatives sharply about the financing behind the road.

Margro said he did not how long an appeal of the decision to the Secretary of Commerce would take.

The road sparked strong opposition from activists, biologists and surfers. Among their fears were that it would ruin inland views from the ocean and destroy the delicate natural balances that give Trestles Beach its world-class surfing.

Supporters also turned out in great numbers.

Each side laid out its case throughout the day as a chanting, sign-toting crowd looked on, trying to quietly pantomime their approval or disapproval, as instructed by commission Chairman Patrick Kruer, but occasionally breaking out into cheers or boos.

The case against the road began with Coastal Commission staff.

“This toll road project is precisely the kind of project the Coastal Act was intended to prevent,” said Coastal Commission executive director Peter Douglas.

But advocates for the agency, including staff and consultants, hit back hard, disputing point by point each criticism leveled by commission staff.

They said objections were mostly myths and that building Foothill South would help save some species, not destroy them. They described why they believe surfing at Trestles would not be even marginally harmed by the road's construction or operation.

“The project will not touch a single grain of sand on any beach,” said Margro.

The flow of sediment from upstream during construction, which the tollway agency says it will carefully control, would not harm Trestles, he said, because a sand berm seals San Mateo Creek from the ocean most of the time. It opens during large storms.

“Only when the lagoon is open will anything affect coastal processes,” he said. The lagoon, he said, has not been open since 2005.

Another significant concern among activists and Coastal Commission staff was the endangered and threatened species habitat in the tollway's path.

Of greatest concern was the Pacific pocket mouse, a highly endangered rodent with only a few small populations left in the coastal area. The toll road route passes close to one of the mouse's last strongholds.

Rob Roy Ramey II, with the consulting firm Wildlife Science International, said construction of the toll road could represent a last hope for the mouse's survival.

A number of city and government officials from Orange County took turns at the microphone, many in support of the toll road, including county Supervisor Chris Norby, and some against, including Laguna Beach Mayor Jane Egly.

“None of us here wants to destroy the coastline,” Norby said. ”But we believe we can protect it while providing access and needed traffic relief.”

Surfer Graham Hamilton of Santa Monica took umbrage at a suggestion made several times that the surfers in the group simply want to protect their local territory.

“My opposition would be just as sharp if it crossed Yosemite or bisected Joshua Tree. The idea of building a toll road through a state park is not only ludicrous, it's lazy.”

A Timeline of Developments to date for proposed toll road extension

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/sciencetech/article_1973532.php
---------------------

And From the Sierra Club:

www.sierraclub.org/ca/coasts/

The California Coastal Commission - at 11:20 pm this evening - voted 8-2 against the Toll Road going through San Onofre State Park. According to Executive Director Peter Douglas, this was the most important vote the Commission had considered since the approval of San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant.

This was possibly the largest turn-out of members of the public for any one hearing.

Particularly strong voices included Commissioner Mary Shallenberger's insightful and knowledgeable comments about the Native American Sacred Sites, and her questioning of the SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office) representative;

Commissioner Larry Clark who explained his several trips on the toll road which alredy exists in Orange County and how very few vehicles travel on it, even while the 405 is continually congested (leading him to also suggest that the new CEO of the toll road authority put to use his background from BART in San Francisco on mass transit solutions!) AND revealed interesting things about the developments ALREADY APPROVED along the sides of the future toll road;

Commissioner Sara Wan, whose biological expertise and rigorous review of applicant reports is always unsurpassed and again was shining as she explained how the applicant's paid experts obviously did not understand how the Pacific Pocketmouse would move toward extinction under the plans for this road;

Commissioner Steve Blank, whose methodical questioning of the toll road's CEO showed off his brilliant mind and abilities as an expert in good business sense, but more importantly he explained about how a private road could simply not be built through a PUBLICLY owned state park and that, regardless of the financial future (which he does think is bleak), when the economy improves, the State Parks, some of which may need to be closed for the short-term, will still be there and are land and resources belonging o the public;

and Commissioner Mike Reilly, who explained several things eloquently, but particularly was good at articulating how depending on a one-time "gift" of funds to State Parks to help with their operating expenses was NOT the solution to State Parks' financial problems....and that we need to look for long-term, dependable funding sources.

AND -- former Commission chief counsel, Ralph Faust, really saved the day for everyone as he testified and explained again when asked about the legal allowances of "balancing" - a sometimes confusing method the Coastal Act allows for to make a decision which might seemingly be against one part of the Coastal Act -- and was attempted to be used by the toll road officials as a reason why this project could be approved. Fortunately, Ralph is an expert at this balancing provision of the Act, and his explanation was what the Commission Chair, Patrick Kruer, said moved him to support the staff recommendation of voting "no" to the federal consistency determination that would have allowed the toll road to proceed.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger sent his Secretary of Resources, Mike Chrisman, to verbalize the Administration's support for the toll road. Fortunately, three of the Governor's appointees did not follow his lead. This was surprising and uncharacteristic, in terms of the history of gubernatorial Commission appointments.

Voting YES - Steve Kram, Bill Burke

Voting NO - Larry Clark, Sara Wan, Bonnie Neely, Steve Blank, Mike Reilly, Khatchik Achadjian, Patrick Kruer, Mary Shallenberger.

There were two missing Commissioners: Ben Hueso (Hueso was ill; his alternate, Lorena Gonzalez, determined she had a conflict of interest due to her employer), Dave Potter (had no alternate)

Thank you letters and cards to the "No" votes are in order....please consider sending. Find addresses for the Commissioners at www.coastal.ca.gov

-----
Bush Signs Bill Allowing California's Tougher environmental rules to apply to Orange County tollway proposed in State Park

By David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

January 30, 2008

In a blow to toll road planners in Orange County, President Bush signed an amended military bill this week that would require them to follow potentially restrictive state environmental laws.

The tollway, which would complete Orange County's network of turnpikes, would cut across San Onofre State Beach, a popular camping and surfing spot.

The amendment to the military authorization bill was pushed by Rep. Susan A. Davis (D-San Diego).

Without it, the toll road agency could have avoided following restrictive California environmental laws.

The Transportation Corridor Agencies, which proposed the 16-mile Foothill South turnpike through southern Orange County, sought a federal exemption to avoid state environmental laws and streamline the approval and regulatory process for the controversial road.

Toll road officials and supporters have said the road would result in traffic relief for the southern part of the county, but opponents say it would affect campgrounds, wild lands, Native American burial sites and famous surf spots, including Trestles.

The estimated $875-million project is scheduled to be reviewed Feb. 6 by the state Coastal Commission, which meets at the Del Mar Fairgrounds. It is considered a critical vote for the project.

In a prepared statement, Davis said the road would have a "devastating impact" on the "unique environment" and recreational resources at San Mateo campground and Trestles Beach, one of California's premier surfing breaks.

"There is no reason why it should have received a special exemption," Davis said.

San Onofre, a state park, is on land leased from Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base. The exemption had allowed federal law to apply to the controversial project when it conflicted with state law, which is often more stringent.

Lance MacLean, a Mission Viejo councilman and chairman of the board that governs the Foothill-Eastern tollway, said the agency sought the exemption because it needed to determine which authority -- state or federal -- it was to follow for the proposed route.

"We needed to know what laws would be enforced on federal property," MacLean said. "Opponents will call it special legislation. It was not special legislation but clarifying legislation."

Removal of the federal exemption no longer allows the agency to defend lawsuits against the Foothill South by contending that state courts have no jurisdiction, said James Birkelund, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a tollway foe.

"The big picture here is the toll road agency has been trying to avoid both state and federal environmental laws and has lobbied for and gotten riders to defense bills to do so," Birkelund said. "We applaud Davis because the law now ensures that this project will comply with state law as with any other project."

Toll road's damage estimate downsized

But it could trigger the extinction of one species

By: DAVE DOWNEY
North County Times
January 29, 2007

SAN ONOFRE - State regulators have decreased the amount of environmental damage they think would be caused by the toll road Orange County officials want to lay down across North San Diego County.

But California Coastal Commission staffers say that the toll road would still do "irreparable harm" to a sensitive coastal wetland, home to a half-dozen imperiled animals.

In a report filed over the weekend in preparation for a key commission hearing next week, the commission's staff downgraded, from 66 acres to 50 acres, its estimate of how much of the potential habitat would be destroyed.

But the damage still would be unacceptable and the project could trigger the extinction of one species, the report says. The Orange County transportation agency looking to build the road strongly disputes that conclusion.

Meanwhile, highway opponents - environmentalists, surfers and frequent state-park visitors - have launched a grass-roots online campaign in advance of next week's meeting. More than 500 people posted videos on YouTube.

"It's not right," said Robin Everett, conservation organizer for the Sierra Club in Orange County, in one video. "State parks should not be used as warehouses for future development."

The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. Feb. 6 and take all day at Wyland Hall on the Del Mar Fairgrounds, 2260 Jimmy Durante Blvd. in Del Mar. Commission staff said they expected more than 2,000 supporters and opponents to attend.

The report is the commission staff's response to a sharply worded Jan. 9 critique by the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency of its initial assessment. The critique prompted the staff to recalculate impacts.

But the staff's underlying conclusion remains unchanged: The $875 million project would exact a terrible toll on the environment within California's fifth-most popular state park - San Onofre State Beach - and is in direct conflict with state and federal environmental laws.

Representatives of Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, the group that wants to build the toll road, stood by its critique Monday.

"We still believe that there are major errors" in the report, said Jennifer Seaton, a spokeswoman for the Irvine-based agency.

The toll-road builder contends the project would tread lightly on the fragile coastal environment.

Foothill/Eastern is trying to get the green light to complete the last leg of Orange County's 67-mile toll road system. The missing link is a 16-mile section of an inland Orange County toll road, Highway 241, which runs south from Highway 91. The plan was to tie the toll road into Interstate 5 at the San Diego-Orange county line.

Even though it is part of an Orange County road system, the agency is proposing to build the last four miles in North San Diego County. That's because San Clemente occupies the southern tip of Orange County and the agency says any route through the quiet beach town would require bulldozing hundreds of homes.

But going around those homes means going through San Onofre state park, parallel to San Mateo Creek. It is primarily along that stream that the environmental toll would be felt, the report says.

"It is highly likely that the project would result in the complete loss of one of the three remaining limited populations of Pacific pocket mouse and thereby hasten the extinction of the entire species," the report concludes.

It also says the toll road would threaten the survival of endangered arroyo toads and southern steelhead trout, which swim upstream on the San Mateo during years of plentiful winter rain.

But the staff's latest estimate of the toll road's threat includes some sharply reduced numbers.

For instance, construction activity would affect 39 acres of the toad's habitat, not 66 acres as estimated earlier, the report says. And 32 acres of gnatcatcher bird habitat would be affected, not 50.

The revised report also says the road's concrete footprints in San Mateo Creek could alter the downstream flow of the cobbles believed to be the source of the world-class waves at Trestles Beach.

Seaton, of the Foothill/Eastern agency, disagreed. "The 241 will have no impact on the delivery of cobbles to the coast," she said.

Citing an analysis by a transportation consultant hired by an environmental group, the commission asserted that a project alternative - widening Interstate 5 in south Orange County - is feasible despite Foothill/Eastern's claims to the contrary. The transportation agency contends that more than 1,200 homes and businesses would have to be bulldozed. The analysis says only about 5 percent of those properties would have to be condemned.

"What this means is, we don't have to destroy the park," said Dan Silver, executive director for the Endangered Habitats League in Los Angeles.

Seaton said the analysis cannot be trusted.

"The reality is that there is no funding to widen I-5, and it cannot be done without taking out hundreds of homes and businesses," she said.

-----

Schwarzenegger backs O.C. tollway; Big Battle Expected at February Coastal Commission Meeting in San Diego

Email Picture

Don Bartletti / Los Angeles Times

The tollway is proposed to run across the upper right of the photo and join I-5 at Basilone Road south of San Clemente. "It's difficult to imagine a more environmentally damaging alternative location," the staff of the Coastal Commission concluded.

Formerly neutral, he now urges the Coastal Commission to approve the Foothill South, which would run through San Onofre State Beach.

By Dan Weikel and David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
January 16, 2008

Backing away from his neutral stance, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday urged the California Coastal Commission to approve a controversial tollway in Orange County that would pass through San Onofre State Beach, one of California's most popular parks.

"I have concluded that this project is essential to protect our environment and the quality of life for everyone in California," Schwarzenegger said in a letter to Patrick Kruer, chairman of the Coastal Commission.

"The project can be built in a manner that will enhance and foster use of the coast and protect coastal resources."

Estimated to cost $875 million, the 16-mile Foothill South tollway is billed as the final link in the network of toll roads operated by Transportation Corridor Agencies.

Planners say the highway will accommodate growth in southern Orange County and relieve congestion on the busy 5 Freeway, but critics have long contended the road will degrade the beach and its famous surf breaks.

The Foothill South would begin at Oso Parkway in Rancho Santa Margarita, pass through the state park north of the beach and connect with the 5 at Basilone Road south of San Clemente.

The proposed roadway will be considered for approval at the Coastal Commission meeting next month in San Diego.

The commission and its staff regulate development along 1,100 miles of California coastline.

"This is very, very big for the toll road. The governor has been silent for so long, and now he's come out in support," said Thomas E. Margro, the TCA's chief executive.

"We've all worked very hard and made sure everyone understood the issues. I think it took a while for all of that to work through."

Margro said he hoped that the Coastal Commission would weigh the governor's support in addition to the merits of the agency's application for a permit.

In September, the commission's staff recommended against approval, saying that building a six-lane toll road through San Onofre would cause widespread violations of state environmental laws by threatening endangered species, marring natural resources and compromising recreational opportunities.

The 236-page analysis conflicts with assertions by the TCA that the proposed route for the Foothill South is the least harmful to the popular coastal park of eight options considered by the Irvine-based agency.

"It's difficult to imagine a more environmentally damaging alternative location," the commission's staff concluded.

The tollway also has been opposed by the State Park and Recreation Commission, which unanimously recommended in November 2005 that the governor oppose the project.

The parks commission was chaired at the time by Bobby Shriver, Schwarzenegger's brother-in-law.

Elizabeth Goldstein, executive director of the California State Parks Foundation and an opponent of the toll road, said the governor's endorsement represented a threat to San Onofre and the independence of the Coastal Commission.

"It's important for the governor and his staff not to lobby the Coastal Commission, but this letter seems to imply that they are," said Goldstein, adding that Ronald Reagan helped create San Onofre State Beach in the early 1970s.

"It's incomprehensible that Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to be remembered as the man who killed it."

But in his letter to the commission, the governor said that he was convinced that with extensive mitigation measures proposed by the TCA, the project could be built in a way that minimized effects on the park's natural resources.

Schwarzenegger's support comes at a time when the state is facing a $14-billion budget gap.

To deal with the problem, the governor has proposed 10% cuts across the board for state agencies and cutbacks and closures involving 48 parks.

Schwarzenegger noted that the Foothill South project was a public-private partnership that would rely on private capital, not state and federal funds, for construction.

He also mentioned that the TCA had offered $100 million to reduce the effect of the road on the park and provide improvements to San Onofre, San Clemente State Park and Crystal Cove State Park.

"The State Route 241 project gives us a chance to protect our parks and our coastline and reduce one of the most damaging environmental problems that plagues our state: traffic gridlock," Schwarzenegger said in his endorsement letter.

---------------
Coastal Commission Staff Calls South Orange County Tollroad Project a Disaster for Wildlife

The Project is Scheduled to be decided upon at the Commission' s meeting on October 11th In San Pedro, at the Crowne Plaza Los Angeles Harbor Hotel, 601 S. Palos Verdes Street

To read the full staff report: http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2007/10/Th19a-10-2007.pdf

Here is an excerpt from the summary:

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA):
The project is fundamentally inconsistent with the spirit and letter of numerous resource protection policies of the Coastal Act. The project involves development within environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and is inconsistent with the ESHA policy (Section 30240), which only allows “uses dependent on the resource” within an ESHA. Moreover, the project is inconsistent with the additional requirements of Section 30240 because it would not protect the ESHAs against any significant disruption of habitat values; not be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade those areas; and not be compatible with the continuance of the ESHAs. The ESHAs include habitat for the Pacific pocket mouse, tidewater goby, arroyo toad, coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell’s vireo, and southern California coast steelhead. The most significant adverse impacts, impacts which cannot be mitigated, would be to the Pacific pocket mouse. In fact, it is highly likely that the project would result in the complete loss of one of the three remaining limited populations of Pacific pocket mouse and thereby hasten the extinction of the entire species, which is federally listed as endangered. The project would also likely result in the loss of the only remaining coastal population of the arroyo toad, also federally listed as endangered, because it proposes at least three years of significant construction activities within more than 66 acres of ESHA for this species. The project also proposes to conduct grading, vegetation removal, and substantial landform alteration associated with the placement of the six lane toll road within 50 acres of the vitally important coastal sage scrub vegetation community that provides federally designated critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher, a third species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. Moreover, the project proposes permanent and prolonged use of wetland areas totaling over 29 acres, areas that have included federally designated critical habitat for two species that are federally listed as endangered, the tidewater goby and arroyo toad, and provide essential ESHA habitat for two others also provided with this listing status, the least Bell’s vireo and southern California coast steelhead.

In addition to the disturbance and destruction of untold numbers of these six species and potentially irreparable harm to their local, regional and global populations, populations which have been consistently recognized as both vitally important and gravely threatened, the project would fragment and transform one of the last remaining intact watersheds and coastal canyon ecosystems in all of southern California. Considering the magnitude, extent and duration of activities associated with the project it is highly likely that well over 66 acres of ESHAs would be degraded or permanently lost. As evidenced by the large number of threatened or endangered species and federally designated critical habitats within the relatively small portion of the project area that is proposed to occupy the coastal zone, and the fact that nearly 48% of the 138 acre project footprint within the coastal zone has been found to meet the Coastal Act definition of ESHA, it would be difficult to imagine a more environmentally damaging alternative location for the proposed toll road and one which would be more clearly inconsistent with the environmentally sensitive habitat resource protection requirements contained within Coastal Act Section 30240.

----------------------
San Diego joins opposition to toll road extension. More than 12 cities or counties disapprove of its route, which cuts through San Onofre park and wetlands.

By David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 27, 2007

San Diego has joined a growing chorus of cities opposed to a toll road extension through San Onofre State Beach, surprising and disappointing tollway officials who are battling for support.

The San Diego City Council voted 6 to 2 Tuesday night to support the state Park and Recreation Commission's opposition to the route and urge the Orange County toll agency to find an alternative, said San Diego Councilwoman Donna Frye, who introduced the resolution with two colleagues.

Map "At stake is setting a precedent that says we should use our public parkland to accommodate more growth and development," Frye said.

The proposed roadway through southern Orange County is bad policy, she said.

San Diego joins more than a dozen cities or counties in the state that oppose the toll road extension. Among them are San Francisco, Los Angeles, Ventura County and the Orange County cities of Laguna Beach and Aliso Viejo, according to a coalition to stop the turnpike.

Although the council's action is nonbinding, Frye said the proposed route travels from Orange County into the northern part of San Diego County and is within San Diego's regional transportation plan.

The Irvine-based Transportation Corridor Agencies needs approvals from state and federal agencies to build the 16-mile Foothill South toll road, which would cross the northern half of the popular coastal park.

San Diego's action takes on greater emphasis coming just two weeks before the toll road's Oct. 11 hearing before the California Coastal Commission, said Sara Feldman, a spokeswoman for the California State Parks Foundation.

"This road is not a good traffic solution," Feldman said. "It cuts through the park and also through a wetlands. It could affect a nearby surfing beach where Trestles is located, and there are 11 endangered or threatened species in the San Mateo watershed."

Getting approval from the Coastal Commission, which regulates development along the state's shoreline, is viewed as the most difficult hurdle for toll road officials. Lance MacLean, chairman of Orange County's Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, which has proposed the extension, said the road had been studied for nearly two decades and during that time had come under heavy scrutiny.

He was surprised that the item was put on the San Diego council agenda after the tollway agency had worked with Southern California regional transportation groups that debated the route.

"It was odd for the San Diego council to weigh in on a project, which, quite frankly, is not in their jurisdiction," MacLean said. Tackling an issue for a proposed project far away from a city council's legislative reach is an "easy political vote," he added.

"It's out of their jurisdiction and it allows them to appease the environmentalists," said MacLean, a Mission Viejo councilman.

Frye took exception with MacLean's view.

"It's not out of our jurisdiction," she said. "The city of San Diego is known, at least in the past few years, as being more environmentally conscious than some of our neighboring cities to the north."

-----------------------------------

Coastal Commission to Hold Hearing, Make Decision Whether to Allow Toll Highway Thru San Onofre State Beach Park

Save the Date—October 11 th ! Attend the October 11th California Coastal Commission (CCC) meeting in San Pedro and tell the Coastal Commissioners to deny the proposed Foothill South Toll Road through San Onofre State Beach. The most important hurdle before the TCA is the powerful, non-partisan Coastal Commission. The Coastal Commission will be meeting in October to decide whether to approve construction of the toll road in the coastal zone. Additionally, the Coastal Commission is charged with making sure the TCA’s road doesn’t pollute the water or harm the surf at Trestles. We expect that the TCA will spend a lot of time and money convincing the CCC that their road is a good idea. We need you to attend the Coastal Commission meeting and let the Commissioners know that Trestles and the San Mateo Campground are too important to be sacrificed for a “pay to drive” road.

Please mark your calendars and plan to take a day off of work or school to join us at this important hearing on October 11 th . The hearing will be held at the Crowne Plaza Los Angeles Harbor Hotel at 601 S. Palos Verdes Street , San Pedro CA 90731. We will also be providing free bus transportation to those who are interested. Do your part to ensure that a great campground, great community and great surf beach remain livable, pristine and protected. We owe it to our community, our kids and future generations. For more information contact Robin Everett at robin.everett@sierraclub.org or call 949-361-7534 Sincerely, Friends of the Foothills Campaign.

http://savesanonofre.com/

-------------------------------
Broken Promise Over South Orange County Tollroad?

http://www.calcoast.org/news/coast0070118.html

O.C. developer sues over Foothill South route

Rancho Mission Viejo says the tollway agency is violating an agreement by planning the route through San Onofre

By David Reyes, Los Angeles Times, January 18, 2007

Citing a disagreement over 150 acres, one of the largest developers in South County on Wednesday sued the transportation agency planning to extend a toll road through San Onofre State Beach.

Rancho Mission Viejo filed suit in Orange County Superior Court after negotiations broke down with the Transportation Corridor Agencies concerning a decade-old agreement under which the company provided acreage allowing the agency to extend the tollway using a "far east alignment."

Last spring, however, the TCA chose a different route, rendering the agreement "null and void," according to a letter that Rancho President Anthony R. "Tony" Moiso sent to the toll road agency Wednesday.

Several meetings between the TCA and the company to resolve the issue have been unsuccessful, Moiso said in the letter.

Rancho Mission Viejo has contended that the route change would affect oak woodlands, impairing its environmental obligations for home construction in the area. In addition, the new route would traverse the Donna O'Neill Land Conservancy.

In a prepared statement, Dan Kelly, the company's senior vice president for governmental relations, said the 1996 agreement was intended to avoid a costly and lengthy legal process. Instead, he said, "the TCA's actions have now forced us to seek the court's help" for clarification.

The 16-mile Foothill South route, one of eight options that were considered, has come under intense criticism by environmental groups because of its proposed path through San Onofre, a popular coastal park containing endangered species, unspoiled wetlands and world-renowned surfing spots.

Yet it would cause the least harm to natural resources and avoid the possibility of condemning hundreds of homes in San Clemente, the TCA has said.

A TCA spokeswoman Wednesday declined to comment on the lawsuit, which, she said, the agency had not yet seen.

-------------------------------------
Development takes toll on South Orange County surf spot

By Doug Green/ Staff writer, The Daily Breeze, 3/23/2007

If you tuned in last summer, the mighty forces of government and commerce, which are one and the same, were closing in on poor little San Onofre and its wave-pumping, world-class neighbor known simply as Trestles.

Their instrument of infamy is a toll road poised like a loaded gun in the hills east of Mission Viejo, taking aim at this surfers' mecca.

The Transportation Corridor Agencies, a consortium of Orange County governments, is planning to extend the 241 toll road on a curving course through the San Mateo watershed, the state park of the same name, a land conservancy area and San Onofre State Beach, a dirt-road surf spot that is great for beginners and rife with vibrations of surfers' fellow love not often felt elsewhere.

This is Orange County and the juice is direct current, that is to say, it flows one way: pro-developer.

Ostensibly, that is, according to the attendant lobbyists and politicians, the toll road will relieve the horrific congestion on Interstate 5, which Orange County visionaries have relied on to supply transportation to the area for the last 50 years as the walled housing tracts filled the flats and terraced developments climbed the hillsides.

Ah, the march of civilization, ever southward -- guided by the wisdom of our civic leaders. Someday, I'm sure, it will reach San Diego.

CEO Bill Woollett says the TCA is "working toward beginning construction as soon as possible, but building a large infrastructure project, no matter how popular and needed is a complex and controversial undertaking."

He says construction will be delayed until 2010 at the earliest, moved back from 2008.

The TCA blames the necessary red tape: environmental impact reports, regulatory agencies, etc. It doesn't mention the four lawsuits against the toll road.

So San Onofre has been given a two-year reprieve, a victory, but the war is anything but over.

"This is still good news," said Mark Rauscher Surfrider Foundation's assistant environmental director. "The longer it doesn't happen makes it more likely that it will never happen."

At first glance Save San Onofre forces look like they're holding aces.

Rauscher said the staff of the Coastal Commission, which must OK the Foothill-South Toll Road, have opposed it on grounds that it was not in compliance with goals of the Coastal Act of 1972.

Surfrider has partnered with the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club to sue TCA.

Rauscher says Attorney General Jerry Brown's office is suing over encroachment onto the public lands on behalf of the California State Parks Commission.

Brown's lawyers are also suing on behalf of the Native American Heritage Commission over seven archeological sites that the toll road will impact.

The fourth lawsuit is a land dispute between TCA and an Orange County landowner.

A favorable bill, AB 1457, has been introduced in the Assembly. Sponsored by Jared Huffman, D-Marin, and co-authored by former L.A. Councilman Mike Feuer, the law requires any park-encroaching road builders to get an OK from the state parks director, which would present another obstacle to the toll road.

Rauscher said Surfrider is hiring someone to rally the troops and the dozens of organizations arrayed against the toll road. He believes with the TCA balking, that the combined strategies are working.

"We see it as a signal that we're doing the right thing, so we're ramping up our public support to protect Trestles and San Onofre," he said.

My understanding of the project is that it is something of a one-shot deal. There are no plans for an alternate route. The TCA is putting all of its money on a toll road that parallels the San Diego Freeway for the length of Camp Pendleton's 19 or 20 miles.

"They (the TCA) definitely have a lot of momentum going," Rauscher said. "It's been going for 20 years or more. This road was planned so long ago that it doesn't address traffic mitigation."

He said the 241 doesn't even connect properly with the I-5 Freeway.

I agree with Rauscher that the fight is far from over.

I'll bet somebody has put a pro-business, pro-developer type or two on the Coastal Commission -- a Republican with a funny accent, perhaps? Mr. Woollett is pretty confident to say that it will only take two years to defeat four lawsuits and an Assembly bill and a host of opponents.

He probably knows something that most people don't know: In politics and business, the juice is direct current, it flows one way -- the way the money wants it to.

But maybe, just maybe, the surf-loving citizens of Southern California can turn aside this loaded weapon and save San-0, like Bambi in its sights. Check it out at savesanonofre.com.

green4surf@yahoo.com