Letters to the Editor: July 3, 2009
On the 5/56 plans
In this article ["One 5/56 option show," June 26], “Caltrans continues to study four alternatives for 5/56: the direct connector, an auxiliary lane, a hybrid connector and a hybrid with flyover.”
It’s easy to lose sight of this since most of the discussion angst centers on the four build alternatives, but CalTrans is actually studying FIVE alternatives: The four “build alternatives” you mention in the piece, plus a fifth “no build alternative.”
This is more than just a distinction without a difference. The forthcoming EIR/EIS environmental review document will study the likely impacts of doing nothing to address the missing connection movements in every degree of detail as they are doing for the build alternatives. It is important (and a requirement under CEQA and NEPA) they do this because the ultimate decision makers have to understand the negative case just as they do the positive case, that is: What is likely to happen if we do nothing?
Thanks for continuing to cover this ongoing story.
Scott E. Tillson
Carmel Valley Community Planning Board
- Letters to the editor: April 3, 2009
- Letters to the Editor: May 15, 2009
- Letters to the Editor: March 6, 2009
- Letters to the editor: April 24, 2009
- 5/56 option shown
Short URL: http://www.delmartimes.net/?p=4725