Loading ... 
Continued opposition to plans for the completion of the 241 Toll Road has many Rancho Santa Margarita residents and business owners frustrated. Bill Lockyer, the California State Treasurer, announced that his office has just filed a suit in San Diego County against the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency alleging that TCA violated the California Environmental Quality Act.
Other suits have been brought by the Native American Heritage Commission and an environmental coalition group that includes Surfrider Foundation, the California State Parks Foundation and the Sierra Club. The basis of the suits is that the TCA neglected to sufficiently address environmental concerns related to the project.
I was born and raised in South Orange County and this has been my home for over forty years. I appreciate concerns for the environment and our beautiful parks and beaches but I also see the undeniable need for an acceptable solution to South Orange County’s growing traffic concerns. I watched the battle over the 73 Toll Road drag on for years before it was completed. That toll road has worked well to ease some of the congestion between San Juan Capistrano and Costa Mesa.
Here’s a critical thing that I think many opponents of the 241 Toll Road are missing: they fail to recognize that the proposed connector benefits the majority. It is the greater good. Many of the opponents have benefited indirectly from the development of communities such as Talega and Ladera Ranch. Ongoing development fosters additional jobs, additional business opportunities and it plays a roll in defining the local housing market; but the infrastructure needs to be in place to adequately support the increased population and it clearly is not.
Traffic congestion just continues to get worse and worse. I love Orange County and I don’t want to see its beauty sacrificed unnecessarily; but these communities have already been developed. Traffic congestion is already a concern. The 241 Toll Road will eventually be completed – it’s just a matter of when. It happened with the 73 Toll Road; it will happen with the 241. The question is “How much more time and money will be wasted in futile lawsuits and political circuses?”
Jennifer Seaton, a spokeswoman for TCA estimates that for every month that the project is delayed it costs an additional $3Mil in construction costs. The project has already been delayed for 2 ½ years. That’s $90Mil folks! With numbers like that it makes me wonder how many Rancho Santa Margarita residents will be able to afford the toll by the time the 241 is finally completed.
Until the attorneys for all parties duke it out in federal court, RSM residents will have to hang tight. More news and information on the proposed extension of the toll road can be found on TCA’s Newsroom
Technorati Tags: 241 Toll Road, business, City of Rancho Santa Margarita, community, construction costs, driving, environment, Fastrak, homeowners, housing development, I 5, information, Ladera Ranch, local, local news, market, money, orange county, Orange County Politics, politics, rancho santa margarita, residents, road construction, rsm, San Juan Capistrano, solutions, south county, south orange county, southern california, state legislators, Talega, TCA, traffic, Transportation Corridor Agencies, transportation improvements
Popularity: 100% [?]
8 responses so far ↓
1 Kaye Thomas // Apr 30, 2007 at 6:30 pm
This is good information.. I use the 73 everytime I have to go to South Orange County.. The 405 is just way too crowded.. I wish we had room to build a few toll roads in LA to take some of the pressure off the regular freeways..
PS… your info keeps floating away from the side.. so check with wordpress..
2 Teri Lussier // May 1, 2007 at 2:09 am
You’ve done a great job of covering this issue. I now know everything about the 241 Toll Rd!
3 Real Estate Blog - Project Blogger Round-Up: Week 4 April 30th- May 6th // May 9, 2007 at 3:36 am
4 Morgan Pietz // Nov 28, 2007 at 9:53 am
Kelly,
I appreciate that residents of Rancho Santa Margarita want a traffic solution.
However, bulldozing the single, remaining pristine watershed left in all of Southern California is simply not the solution. Widen the 5, go around Pendleton. Anything but this.
What is wrong with this plan is that a group of a few OC politicans are making a decision that impacts people from all over Southern California. The San Onofre campgrounds are the fifth most visited parks in California. Clearly, this is not just a Rancho Santa Maragarita issue.
There is exactly one place you can go in the ocean after a rain (and not get sick) in all of Southern California: Trestles/San Onofre. Why? It is literally the only watershed not fouled by runoff and pollutants that necessarily accompany development in a watershed area.
I realize that developers are eager to get their hands on new land they can exploit (and realtors like you are eager to sell what they build), just like what happened when they built the 73. But the “well, we built these communities, so now we need more roads to support them” logic is circular. If you build this road, you beget more communities, which begets the need for yet more roads.
At what point do we say enough development? I’ll tell you my answer: it has gone too far when you start talking about buldozing over the final, remaining, unspoilt coastal wildnerness that remains in all of sothern california. If you want to build a new road to alleviate traffic problems, thats great. All I am saying is build it on private land. Dont do irreparable harm that can never be undone, and ruin something which is (sadly) now one of a kind. I say that establishing the precedent of development on state parks is exactly the wrong message to send to developers and the state. If we keep that up our grandkids will simply never see the beautiful, natural California (of which there are increasingly fewer and smaller slivers left) which I know and love.
Sorry Kelly, but I really think you are missing the whole point, and I couldn’t disagree with you more.
5 david // Jan 15, 2008 at 10:49 am
I agree with morgan not rsm.Even my uneducated dumb ass can see that this is about the rich benifiting from the marginalized middle class and poor people.this 241extension wont help a thing .I know this because I see it happening right now,they will take the land no matter what any group of surfers say or do.Why you ask?because I drive and sit on all the major freeways that were supposed to be helped by toll roads and they were ok for a month or two then right back to normal gridlock…
6 Anthony // Feb 7, 2008 at 11:40 am
First of all, anyone who drives the I5 from orange County into San Diego or visa versa knows that right now it doesn’t get congested where the toll road is suppose to help relieve. TCA is saying it will prevent future congestion. What people don’t hear about is that there is a “no Road Competition” Law which states no other highway within 5 miles can be built and no other aid can be funded that would “compete” with the toll road that way the toll road can make the money to payback the bonds. This means limited aide can go to fix or maintain the 5 freeway!!! To top it off most of south orange county has to pay Mell-Roos tax from our mortgages which goes to repay the bonds used to fix the roads along with other services. So even if I don’t ride the toll road I’m paying for it through my mortgage!!! I’m glad to hear there are “some” people who ride the 73. Realistically most people choose NOT to pay the toll and still ride on the 5 into the 405. That’s why the 73 is not crowded. Selected few individuals are willing to spend the money. The same thing is true for the 241. So it’s naive to think that traffic will be divided equally among the freeways. Few people in south ORANGE COUNTY will actually use the toll road. Yes maybe RSM residents, but the real people who benefit are the inlanders like residents of Riverside county. Those bonds are an investment and if they get extended from 33 to 99 years investors, like members of the chamber of commerce, will be laughing their way to the bank.
7 BDiego // Mar 9, 2008 at 11:10 am
Just a warning, the manual toll machines are unreliable at El Toro. I used the 73 toll road a few weeks ago, paid the $2 toll, and got a “notice of toll evasion” today. This is bogus, they have me on video camera putting in $2 (it’s clear the money went in), the machine confirmed it, and I have a witness.
I thought these people were pretty professional, but apparently when it comes to other peoples money they won’t bother to check a simple video. The fine is $47.50 plus $2 they want me to pay a second time. $97 if not paid in 1 week. That’s not a lot of money to me, but they have no right to ask for it.
The only thing I can think of that would explain this is if the machine considered us a second car, with the “previous car” also being us. It did take some time to find clean bills for the machine to use. Again, video surveillance would make this obvious.
In any case, they have right in front of them the proof that I paid. This is theft through incompetence, plain and simple. Any time you give a private business the ability to demand money from people at will, you have a conflict of interest. I want to go to court in front of a judge, I don’t want this same business to handle my claim.
8 UltimateYota.com - CA-241 Toll Road Extension **Orange County/San Diego** "Save Trestles" // Jun 8, 2008 at 3:48 am
Leave a Comment