County supervisors and the Council of Governments are
disappointed with the design for a project to build a flyover at
the intersection of highways 152 and 156, fearing it will bring
more traffic into San Benito County.
Hollister – County supervisors and the Council of Governments are disappointed with the design for a project to build a flyover at the intersection of highways 152 and 156, fearing it will bring more traffic into San Benito County.
“COG is opposed to the alternative chosen by the VTA,” said COG Traffic Planner Mary Dinkuhn.
Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority officials want to build a flyover at the intersection to prevent traffic from backing up all the way to U.S. 101, as it often does on weekends and holidays. An environmental impact report for the project, which is being undertaken by the VTA, shows that the VTA chose a design that some in San Benito County believe will funnel more traffic into the county because vehicles headed to Gilroy will have to take an off-ramp, rather than just continue straight on the highway.
“There is no question, this will increase traffic in San Benito County and increase truck traffic also,” County Supervisor and COG Board Member Anthony Botelho said at a recent board meeting where he and Supervisor Pat Loe delivered a report on the issue to their fellow supervisors.
“They’re bent on solving their little problems without taking into account the effect on (Caltrans) District 5 and San Benito County,” he said.
A second design alternative, which was favored by COG, was not included as an option in the environmental impact report. According to Loe, who also sits on the COG board, the VTA agreed in 2003 to include both designs in the environmental impact report.
Loe said she was “shocked” when she saw that the report did not include the COG-favored design.
“The VTA was going to look at both,” she said.
According to Loe, the design that COG favored would keep traffic moving east to west and would include an off-ramp for motorists who want to drive into San Benito County. The design chosen by the VTA will bring more traffic into the county.
“I hate to say it, I really feel they’re saying, ‘We’ll get it out of our county and it’s not our problem,” she said.
John Ristow, a deputy director with the VTA, said that it is standard to include only one preferred design on an environmental impact report, and his agency never agreed to include the COG-favored design.
“It was probably a misunderstanding,” he said. “We’ll certainly try to resolve that with them.”
The VTA choose the design that it did – one of four or five that were considered – because it fit the natural terrain of the area better than the COG-favored design, according to Ristow.
“It just ended up being a better alternative,” he said.
But regardless of the design, Ristow said, the project will not increase traffic in San Benito County.
“Really, it’s pretty neutral,” he said. “The project itself doesn’t increase traffic.”
Both San Benito County and COG sent letters to the VTA this week stating their concerns.
“The (letter) asked, “Why wasn’t this alternative addressed?” Dinkuhn said.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Botelho said, “I think we need to insist that these areas be addressed.”
Before moving forward with the project, the VTA must address the concerns raised by the county and COG in a final environmental impact report. And then the report must be approved by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration, according to Ristow.
“We’ll certainly try to resolve this with them (San Benito),” he said. “They’re doing their job, making sure that things are well thought through.”
It may be a year before construction on the flyover begins, Ristow said.
Luke Roney covers politics and the environment for the Free Lance. Reach him at 831-637-5566 ext. 335 or at
lr****@fr***********.com
.
