Responses To Pro & Con Tunnel Articles

In the October 4th edition of the San Diego Union-Tribune, Councilmember Carrie Downey wrote an editorial supporting the tunnel project, "Pro: Managing traffic and its impact is a regional issue."  That same day, former Councilmember Frank Tierney wrote an editorial opposing the tunnel project, "Con: Expensive tunnel not the solution."

In response to those Pro and Con Tunnel articles, the following letters were printed in this past Sunday's (October 11, 2009) San Diego Union-Tribune's "Letters to the Editor":

Tunnel vision in Coronado?

Regarding your “Underground Solution?” pro and con commentaries on a Coronado tunnel in the Oct. 4 Dialog section:

Coronado Councilwoman Carrie Downey is part of a small group of individuals who have shamefully squandered $14 million of precious funds on this bogus tunnel study. The tunnel study, aka SR75/282 Transportation Corridor Enhancement Project, may have been a scam from its beginning. It may end up as the biggest scandal in Coronado's history.

This is not a “regional transportation issue” as Downey claims, and has little to do with SANDAG. The United States Navy wants no part of it.

This approximately $14 million has been paid to Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. and to a Washington, D.C., lobbyist whose files have been seized by the FBI and is under federal investigation. After $14 million has been spent, Coronado has virtually nothing to show for it.

If indeed a tunnel was really even considered, former Councilman Frank Tierney's analysis is correct. It is wildly impractical. Meanwhile, can you imagine how many real public projects could have been completed with the $14 million frittered away?

JERRY TOCI
Coronado

No tunnel support exists on any level. Locally, Coronado residents are overwhelmingly against it. In a 1998 advisory vote, they directed their government to investigate funding for one thing — a bored tunnel. The cut-and-cover tunnel option was voted down in a prior advisory vote. Coronado voters never approved wasting $14 million on an impractical project.

Legally, state Route 75 bridge drivers cannot be charged a $5 toll or more to pay off bond debt for a tunnel that would be a private road controlled by a public/private partnership. Coronado taxpayers will resist bond debt for tunnel construction and budget increases for tunnel maintenance.

Coronado land-use decisions no longer should be controlled by a few outside interests who would amass personal fortunes from a tunnel. With strong local and regional support, I'm working on an affordable and safe park-and-ride program to reduce our carbon footprint as detailed at barbaratdenny.com .

Prior to being sworn in as a Coronado City Council member in June, I worked in land use and water law, prevented regional officials from defunding commuter ferry service and worked on the Coronado Transportation Management Association to improve transit service in Coronado. As a council member, I voted against spending $1.5 million of Coronado taxpayers' money on the tunnel project.

BARBARA DENNY
Member, Coronado City Council

As frequent Coronado rush-hour travelers, it is evident to us the root cause bottleneck is at the entry point to North Island Naval Air Station. No additional roads, tunnels or buses will improve anything unless the number of individual vehicles is decreased or the number of entry lanes and the guard staffing are increased.

If a multilane tunnel is built that merges to the same external entry lane point, the same wait will ensue, only now underground, in a noisy, stinky, claustrophobic traffic-packed hole.

Would Coronadans who favor making commuters go underground be willing to pay 100 percent of the costs of less traffic on the streets? That is $500 million divided by 25,000 people — $20,000 for each resident. We think not.

CLIFF LEONG
Encinitas
LISA HEINZ
Coronado

My wife and I live on Fourth Street between Orange Avenue and the bridge. We have been directly involved in the traffic issues for the past eight years and have provided some modest voice for the 700-plus households along the Third and Fourth streets corridor.

Most of the alternatives under environmental study could destroy significant portions of our neighborhood. As for buses and carpools, it would take approximately 335 15-passenger vans or 105 48-passenger buses to remove just 5,000 single-driver vehicles from the daily mix. Take 5,000 out of the 90,000 and we would not even notice the difference.

Neither Downey nor Tierney has any meaningful solution. This traffic volume entering and leaving Coronado each day is a monumental and, quite probably, insurmountable problem.

While many in the community would like everything to be the way it was before the bridge, that isn't going to happen. From our perspective, it is not difficult to get around in Coronado. We just want motorists to proceed through our community with courtesy and respect, and at the proper speed limit.

DICK SCHARFF
Coronado

Four letters were written, all opposing the tunnel project. No letters were written in favor of the proposed tunnel/alternatives.

Comments

[JM65]

NO ONE is for this tunnel, unless they stand to make $$$ off of it. So why is it not ended or if necessary, put on a ballot so that the citizens can vote it down once and for all?

[AnneC]

These Coronado citizens sent a strong message. Anyone listening?

[mcd]

This tunnel is a total ridiculous use of money...Let the citizens vote...why are we making this a convenience for the navy...when they will not participate at all??? That's all of our traffic!!! All I can see is...someone is making money frm this...past mayor...current peeps in the community is all I can see. Check the FBI investigations...and vote NO for the tunnel!