Environmental Issues > Wildlands Main Page > All Wildlands Documents

		NRDC's Daniel Hinerfeld reports on the fight to save San Onofre.
	The proposed road threatens San Mateo Creek, endangered species such as the Pacific pocket mouse, and Trestles Beach.

The California Coastal Commission has officially objected to a proposed six-lane toll road that would have cut straight through one of southern California's most popular state parks -- San Onofre State Beach. After completing a rigorous legal and factual analysis, Coastal Commission staff presented a comprehensive report showing how the toll road threatens San Onofre State Beach and violates numerous state coastal policies. In February 2008, the Coastal Commission voted 8 to 2 to reject the destructive highway plan. However, despite this major victory, the battle wasn’t over. Toll road proponents appealed the Coastal Commission's decision to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. In December 2008, the objections were upheld.

Each year, some two and a half million people find their way to San Onofre State Beach, one of California's most popular state parks. They come for the world-class surfing at Trestles beach, for biking, hiking, kayaking and camping along sandstone bluffs and lovely San Mateo Creek, or perhaps for spotting an endangered bird in the dense shrubbery. The park is a rare treasure in Southern California, a spot on the coast for everyone to enjoy. Yet San Onofre was also the preferred site for a new six-lane road that would have run through nearly the entire length of the park and, according to state parks officials, caused 60 percent of it to close.

The proposed Foothill-South toll road would have cut a 320-acre concrete path running more than four miles through the inland portion of the park. The project would have destroyed key habitat for 11 endangered or threatened species, including the steelhead trout, the arroyo toad and the least Bell's vireo, and would disrupt San Mateo Creek, one of the last unspoiled watersheds in Southern California. It would have ruined the popular San Mateo campground, currently so much in demand that it books up six months in advance for the summer. Seven archaeological sites would have been put in jeopardy, and contaminated runoff would have poured into the renowned Trestles surfing beach.

Better solutions exist to ease traffic congestion in the area, such as modern rapid transit, carpool toll lanes with congestion-sensitive pricing and strategic widening of Interstate 5. These solutions can address traffic needs in Orange County without compromising precious park land. The Foothill-South toll road proposal failed to fully consider any of these alternatives. Foothill-South violated the fundamental principle that parklands are set aside for us and for future generations because they're critical to quality of life; parks are not a way to warehouse land until it is ripe for development. If San Onofre had become fair game for highway construction, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the paving of other state parks.

"In my 30 years experience, I have never seen a project more deserving of rejection," Joel Reynolds, senior attorney at NRDC, commented after the final decision. "The transportation agency lobbied 20 years for this toll road, spent billions of dollars on lobbyists, and were trying to shove the $1.1 billion dollars for this road onto the shoulders of taxpayers already burdened by the economy. You simply couldn't design a transportation project that does more harm to taxpayers and the environment and less good for congestion relief."

The Secretary of Commerce's decision to uphold the California Coastal Commission’s vote is a major victory for NRDC, for San Onofre beach and its visitors, and for state parks across the country.

Photo credits: courtesy Steve Francis

last revised 12/19/2008