They’re not ready to give up the fight.
Proponents of a plan to build an entirely new highway
– called the
”
3-in-1 proposal
”
– remain persistent and hopeful their project is the best
solution to growing congestion on San Benito County roadways.
They’re not ready to give up the fight.
Proponents of a plan to build an entirely new highway – called the “3-in-1 proposal” – remain persistent and hopeful their project is the best solution to growing congestion on San Benito County roadways.
But as time ticks along, other highway projects they hope the 3-in-1 would replace have progressed – including safety improvements and widening of highways 25 and 156. Officials who oppose the 3-in-1, meanwhile, say it’s not realistic – at least now – and that it wouldn’t solve concerns about traffic safety or congestion.
Supporters of the 3-in-1, though, say an analysis being conducted by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority – called the Southern Gateway study – is a key to determining what projects get funding priority from cash-strapped state and local transportation agencies.
The proposal, first broached about two decades ago, would include building a four- or six-lane highway from Highway 101 to the intersection of highways 152 and 156, known as the Don Pacheco Y. Proponents believe it would divert traffic from those two roads and Highway 25 and relinquish the need to do major construction on them.
Anthony Botelho, who was Farm Bureau president when the organization started officially backing the proposal in 2000, said it’s not too late to switch gears. Now, Botelho is running for supervisor in November against Anthony Freitas.
“I think we have time to change our direction and start planning in the interest of preserving our rural character,” Botelho said.
He and others with the Farm Bureau would rather see a new highway built – while forgoing planned widening of the dangerous highways 25 and 156. They say the widening of Highway 156, in particular, would prevent further growth and congestion in the San Juan Valley, while protecting precious farmland and preventing drainage damage.
But with local and statewide funding shortages, and the 3 in 1 carrying an estimated $250 million to $300 million price tag, the VTA says a new inter-regional highway likely wouldn’t get funding for anytime soon.
“Any major improvements are many, many years away,” said Amin Surani, senior transportation engineer for VTA, on Friday.
The agency’s Southern Gateway study, which has been delayed due to funding constraints, should be finished in October or November, Surani said. It will lay out the VTA’s recommendations for what highway projects should get priority, and why.
The Council of Governments (COG), which has advocated the widening of highways 156 and 25 over the 3-in-1, also is awaiting results of the Southern Gateway study.
“The three in one plan is a good plan, but we need to take close consideration of where the money would come from for that project,” said COG member Tony LoBue, also a Hollister City Councilman.
Locally, the debate heated up as the number of highway tragedies mounted. Since 2000, there have been 19 fatalities on Highway 25; nine on Highway 156; and 15 on Highway 152, according to statistics compiled by the Farm Bureau.
California Highway Patrol Capt. Bob Davies still says the 3-in-1 proposal is not the best solution to growing traffic safety concerns.
And while the Farm Bureau believes a new highway would divert traffic from the other major roadways, Davies still believes building a new highway doesn’t mean locals would use it.
Highways 25, 152 and 156 are each used by drivers for different types of reasons such as locals commuting on Highway 25, inter-regional truckers using Highway 152 and inter-regional commuters and truckers using Highway 156, he said.
“To take those three types of users on one route creates a complex traffic management crisis for me,” Davies said.
Davies also realizes, and remains wary, that Botelho is running for county supervisor.
“Does one individual on a political board make a difference? My answer to that is – absolutely,” Davies said.
Freitas, Botelho’s opponent for the District 2 supervisor’s seat, isn’t opposed to the 3-in-1 concept, he said. But he doesn’t see it as realistic, not for another 20 or 30 years.
“It’s a dream that’s not going to happen,” Freitas said. “When it gets to the time when that can happen, I will be standing behind it 100 percent.”
The Farm Bureau still thinks that time could be now. Botelho wouldn’t mind seeing San Benito County halt its commitments to Highways 25 and 156.
“Sometimes your first loss is your best loss,” he said.
