- Caltrans’ Richardson Grove Project is Looking Pretty Dead. Enter the FBI!
- Caltrans Ordered to Redo Richardson Grove Environmental Documentation
- Decision in Richardson Grove Case
- EPIC Claims Victory in Latest Richardson Grove Ruling
- EPIC: Richardson Grove Realignment Project “Not Active At All” Anymore
- Caltrans: Richardson Grove Realignment Project Still Going Forward
- Judge Denies Environmental Groups’ Request for Attorney Fees in Richardson
- Caltrans Relaunches Richardson Grove Project; Agency Issues New Environmental Documentation For Controversial Highway 101 Realignment at the South End of the County
- As Expected, EPIC and Others Launch New Lawsuit Against Caltrans’ Richardson Grove Improvement Project
Another lawsuit challenging Caltrans’ Richardson Grove Improvement Project, another bout of dueling rhetoric from each side.
Below, the Center for Biological Diversity announces a fifth lawsuit against the project, and in doing so they allege the “terrible proposal” would destroy iconic redwoods, waste taxpayer money and release toxic lead into the surrounding environment.
In a response, issued this afternoon, Caltrans describes the project as a matter of some “minor adjustments” that will help local businesses without removing or harming any of the old growth redwoods.
At the bottom of the post you can find the lawsuit itself.
From the Center for Biological Diversity:
Unnecessary Caltrans Project Would Destroy Iconic Trees in Richardson Grove
SAN FRANCISCO— Environmental groups and local residents again sued the California Department of Transportation for approving a highway-widening project that would needlessly damage or destroy thousand-year-old redwood trees in California’s iconic Richardson Grove State Park along Highway 101 in Humboldt County.
This is the fifth legal challenge to Caltrans’ approval of the controversial “Richardson Grove Operational Improvement Project.” The project would damage the roots of more than 100 of Richardson Grove’s ancient redwoods, including trees up to 3,000 years old, 18 feet in diameter and 300 feet tall. Caltrans has pursued this project solely to incrementally improve passage for oversized commercial trucks, and continues to rely on inadequate environmental review.
Quotes from plaintiffs
“This ancient grove is special and I cannot let those trees die,” said plaintiff Bess Bair, whose grandparents owned the adjacent Hartsook Inn and worked to preserve Richardson Grove. “Caltrans can’t show any science that cutting into their roots won’t kill these redwoods. The local community does not want this project.”
“My great grandfather Henry Devoy entrusted 120 acres of old-growth redwoods here in 1922 at the inception of Richardson Grove,” said plaintiff Trisha Lotus, who is intent on maintaining her family’s legacy to protect Richardson Grove State Park. “That’s why we’re fighting Caltrans’ plan to cut into their roots, which could compromise their health and could kill these trees.”
“People made tremendous sacrifices to protect our state parks and we can’t let Caltrans’ ill-conceived project and hasty decision threaten the wonders of Richardson Grove,” said plaintiff Jeff Hedin of Piercy, Calif. “Caltrans owes the public a robust and thorough discussion of our environmental and safety concerns. They haven’t done that.”
“We need transportation policies and projects that prioritize both environmental and economic sustainability, and truly represent the most cost-effective safety measures,” said plaintiff and Humboldt County business owner David Spreen. “Caltrans’s Highway 101 Richardson Grove project fails on all counts.”
“Caltrans hasn’t changed or improved anything about this project. It’s the same terrible proposal to damage ancient redwoods in our state park with no benefits to the community,” said Jeff Miller of the Center for Biological Diversity. “There’s no compelling traffic or safety reason to destroy these beautiful trees. The project is a non-starter.”
“Caltrans’ priorities are all mixed up,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center. “Instead of keeping our storm-damaged roads open or fixing the disaster-in-waiting at Last Chance Grade, Caltrans continues to waste taxpayer money to push the disastrous Richardson Grove Project.”
“If Caltrans digs up the roadbed through Richardson Grove, toxic lead left by previous generations will be released into the park and surrounding environment, something Caltrans hasn’t yet owned up to,” said Patty Clary of Californians for Alternatives to Toxics. “We can’t sit by when so much is at stake with this gem of a park.”
The latest lawsuit challenges Caltrans’ violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, due to inadequate evaluation of the environmental impacts of cutting into tree roots, and the Transportation Act, which requires highway projects with federal funding to minimize harm to natural resources in state parks.
The lawsuit was filed yesterday filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California by the Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Protection Information Center, Friends of Del Norte, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, and longtime local residents Bess Bair, Trisha Lee Lotus, Jeffrey Hedin and David Spreen.
Previous legal challenges had blocked construction and forced Caltrans to rescind all project approvals in 2014. The agency quietly reapproved the project in May 2017. Caltrans claims it has made significant changes but still intends to cut into tree roots, a procedure that would threaten the stability and viability of old-growth redwoods. The conservation groups also filed suit challenging the new approval in state court in June.
Richardson Grove State Park, where tourists often first encounter large redwoods when heading north on Highway 101, is home to one of the last protected stands of accessible old-growth redwood trees in the world. The park has essential habitat for threatened and endangered species such as the northern spotted owl, and its creeks support runs of imperiled salmon and steelhead trout.
Caltrans first proposed the project in 2007, claiming the widening is needed to accommodate large-truck travel. However, Highway 101 through Richardson Grove is already designated for larger trucks and does not have significant safety problems. The agency cannot demonstrate that the project is necessary for safety or would benefit the local economy.
The attorneys for the plaintiffs in this suit are Philip Gregory of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP; Stuart Gross of Gross & Klein LLP; and Sharon Duggan, a staff attorney with EPIC and a long-time expert on environmental law.
And a response from Caltrans:
The Richardson Grove Operational Improvement Project would make minor adjustments to the current alignment of U.S. Highway 101 in and near Richardson Grove State Park in Humboldt County to allow access by industry standard-sized trucks, which can be slightly longer than the currently allowed California legal trucks. This project, which would increase the efficiency of goods movement, has long been a priority of the County of Humboldt. Project proponents also include many small local businesses.
No old growth redwood trees would be removed or threatened by this project. This minor project would disturb 0.67 acres of soil along 1.1 miles of U.S. Highway 101. For comparison, Richardson Grove State Park is approximately 2,000 acres. Caltrans has taken the utmost care in designing the project with sensitivity to the environment and has thoroughly analyzed potential environmental impacts. Documentation of the analyses is readily accessible on the project webpage at dot.ca.gov/dist1/d1projects/richardson_grove/.
Since 2010, there have been minor reductions in the project footprint and slight changes to meet current safety standards. There have been four public meetings and five public comment periods held for this project, more than any other contemporary project in Caltrans District 1.
# # #