[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 162 (Friday, August 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44947-44948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22541]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental Impact Statement: Monterey County, California
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a
supplement to a final environmental impact statement will be prepared
for a proposed highway project in Monterey County, California.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John R. Schultz, Chief, District Operations North, Federal Highway
Administration, 980 Ninth Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, California,
95814-2724; telephone: (916) 498-5041.
[[Page 44948]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FHWA, in cooperation with the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans), will prepare a supplement to
the final Environmental Impact Statement-Report (EIS/R) on a proposal
to improve State Route (SR) 1 in Monterey County, California. The
original final EIS/R for the improvements (FHWA-CA-EIS-86-05-F) was
approved on October 2, 1991. The project study limits of alternatives
considered in the final EIS/R extended from 0.28 miles south of the
Carmel River to 0.1 mile south of the Route 1/68 interchange, a
distance of 3.1 miles.
The preferred alternative, identified in the final EIS/R and
selected in the Record of Decision signed on November 14, 1991, is
known as Alternative 1C Modified. Alternative 1C Modified provides a
four-lane divided freeway on a new alignment through Hatton Canyon from
Carmel Valley Road to the existing freeway interchange at Carmel Hill
(State Route 1/68). A two-lane conventional highway will cross the
Carmel River on a new 57-foot wide bridge and transition into the new
freeway near Carmel Valley Road. The existing Carmel River Bridge and
the roadway between Oliver Road and the southern limits of the new
alignment would be removed. A new connection between the existing
highway at Oliver Road and the new alignment would be constructed with
an at-grade intersection on the new alignment between Rio Road and the
Carmel River Bridge. Interchanges on the new freeway will be
constructed at Carmel Valley Road and at Carpenter Street. A grade
separation will be constructed at Rio Road. Carmel Valley Road will be
widened from two to four lanes between the existing highway and Carmel
Rancho Boulevard.
Litigation regarding this project commenced in January 1992 (City
of Carmel-by-the-Sea, et al. v. United States Department of
Transportation, et al., Civ. No. 92-20002 SW), when plaintiffs City of
Carmel-by-the-Sea, Sierra Club, Hatton Canyon Coalition and the
Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District filed an action alleging that
the United States Department of Transportation (and several individual
Federal officials) and the State of California Department of
Transportation (and several individual State officials) failed to
comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC Section 4321
et seq (NEPA), and the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub.
Res. Code Section 21000 et seq (CEQA), as well as Executive Orders
11988 (floodplain management) and 11990 (protection of wetlands) in
preparing an EIS/R and making findings for the project. The plaintiffs
specifically alleged that the analysis in the EIS/R was deficient with
respect to its analysis of wetlands impacts, analysis of Monterey Pine
impacts, consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives, analysis
of cumulative impacts, and analysis of growth-inducing impacts.
In August of 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit found that the EIS/R was adequate under both NEPA and CEQA with
respect to its analysis of wetlands impacts, analysis of Monterey Pine
impacts, consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives and
analysis of growth-inducing impacts. The Court of Appeals also found
that the findings made pursuant to Executive Orders 11988 and 11990
were proper. The Court of Appeals remanded the issue of the adequacy of
the EIS/R with respect to its analysis of cumulative impacts to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
for further consideration. In July 1998, the District Court found that
the EIS/R was inadequate with respect to its analysis of cumulative
impacts, and enjoined construction of the project until such time as
full compliance with NEPA and CEQA is established.
The purpose of this supplemental EIS/R is to comply with the
decision of the District Court. The supplement will address the
deficiencies in the final EIS/R as determined in the litigation and
make any necessary additional revisions to the final EIS/R.
A public hearing will be held on the draft supplemental EIS/R.
Public notice will be given of the time and place of the hearing. The
draft supplemental EIS/R will be available for public and agency review
and comment prior to the public hearing.
Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the
supplemental EIS/R should be directed to the FHWA at the address
provided above.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205,
Highway Research, Planning and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this
program)
Issued on August 14, 1998.
G.P. Bill Wong,
Senior Transportation Engineer, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. 98-22541 Filed 8-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-M
