SF Gate: Bush speeds up transportation project reviews/SFO hopes runway expansion will be put on list of vital work

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SF Gate.
The original article can be found on SFGate.com here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/chronicle/archive/2002/09=
/20/MN216209.DTL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, September 20, 2002 (SF Chronicle)
Bush speeds up transportation project reviews/SFO hopes runway expansion wi=
ll be put on list of vital work
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau


   Washington -- President Bush ordered on Thursday faster environmental
reviews for big transportation projects deemed vital to the nation's
economy -- providing San Francisco International Airport officials hope
that their ambitious runway expansion plan could get off the ground
quicker.
   Environmentalists ripped Bush's order, calling it an effort to short-
circuit important studies of major transportation projects like the
airport's plan to fill in hundreds of acres of the bay.
   While not citing any specific projects, the administration said the
existing review process, which can stretch out for years, was delaying
important work and hindering a "strong American economy." The White House
also said the president's order placing the Department of Transportation
in charge of such studies wouldn't compromise environmental quality, an
assertion the environmentalists scoffed at.
   "Too many transportation projects become mired for too long in the compl=
ex
web of clearances required by federal and state law," Transportation
Secretary Norm Mineta said in a letter to key members of Congress and the
nation's governors. "This initiative is intended to make our
transportation investments more efficient, helping to ease congestion and
reduce pollution."
   The order also created a Cabinet-level task force to review the list of
priority projects every few months and make sure the decision-making
process is moving along expeditiously.
   San Francisco has spent about $70 million over the past four years on the
federal and state environmental review process, which is still in its
early stages. The airport proposes to lengthen its four runways and
rebuild them farther apart. It's expected that the first draft of the
voluminous study of the plans won't be complete until the middle of next
year at the earliest.
   After that, there is more time set aside for public comments, another
round of study and votes and rulings by about 40 local, state and federal
authorities that would have to approve the runway project.
   Under voter-approved Proposition D, San Francisco's electorate would also
have to OK the plan because it probably would involve filling more than
100 acres of the bay. The most extensive of the options still under review
calls for filling about 1,000 acres of the bay.
   After all that, lawsuits are possible, claiming that the environmental
review process was inadequate or mistaken in its conclusions.
   On average, Mineta's office said, it takes 10 years for an airport proje=
ct
to go from planning to opening. Highways take 13 years.
   Airport spokesman Mike McCarron said Thursday that the airport staff had
just learned of Bush's order and had no idea whether San Francisco's
project would be included on the list of vital projects.
   He also wouldn't criticize the environmental impact report process. "I
don't think it's been overly onerous," said McCarron. "It's been very
detailed. "
   But David Lewis of Save the Bay, a group that opposes the runway project,
said, "I'm concerned the runways will be included under the president's
order. It would be a huge mistake, but I'm not surprised."
   Lewis said that all too often "streamlining" and "expedited" had become
Bush administration buzzwords for cutting environmental protections.
   "This suggests the potential for short-circuiting, and that's a bad
thing," he added. "The (environmental report) process has prevented a lot
of damage over the years by disclosing alternatives that are better."
   Bush didn't set specific timetables for expedited reviews, leaving that =
to
Mineta, who first must identify the key projects. San Francisco's airport
project, along with the O'Hare International Airport expansion in Chicago,
would seem prime candidates because their congestion causes significant
delays for passengers and cargo in two key metropolitan areas.
   Bush's order came as advocates of major transportation projects were
testifying before a House subcommittee about renewing the federal highway
and transit construction program.
   Contractors, state highway administrators, construction union leaders,
truckers and transit advocates called for streamlining the environmental
review process.
   "We need to do more projects, without reducing our environmental
stewardship," said William Fay, president of the American Highway Users
Alliance.

   E-mail Edward Epstein at eepstein@sfchronicle.com.=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2002 SF Chronicle

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]