Infrastructure protectionCourt: San Diego infrastructure, mass transportation plans fail to meet climate tests

Two lawsuits by environmental groups including the Sierra Club, the Cleveland National Forest Foundation, and the Center for Biological Diversity, against the San Diego County government and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) could force the region to rethink how it plans to spend billions of dollars in the next few decades on infrastructure and mass transportation projects. On 29 October, an appellate court supported a Superior Court’s ruling that San Diego County’s climate action plan fails to set deadlines, quantifiable standards, and enforcement measures needed to lower emissions of greenhouse gases. The action plan, which addresses the issues of growth and climate change within the unincorporated areas of San Diego County, fails to meet requirements set by the California Environmental Quality Act. “It’s a big wake-up call for the San Diego region, which has continually ignored the science, ignored the policy and the laws,” said Jana Clark, a board member of the Cleveland National Forest Foundation.

Last week, the same appellate court supported a lower court’s rejection of SANDAG’s 2050 Regional Transportation Plan, which seeks to spend $214 billion on transportation projects over the next forty years. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, California has issued directives for local agencies to reduce greenhouse emissions by 2050- when climate pollutants are expected to increase sharply- and to inform the public how it plans to do so. SANDAG’s plan violated state law by failing to fully account for, and take steps to decrease, greenhouse gases and harmful air pollution in its environmental review of the area’s long-range transportation plan. “We are upholding the right of the public and our public officials to be well-informed about the potential environmental consequences of their planning decisions,” the ruling said.

“What this means is: it’s not enough to continue to expand freeways. It’s not enough to continue to add lanes. It’s not even enough to do sorts of transit projects that rely on buses,” said Andrew Keatts, a Voice of San Diego reporter. “What this would mean is: You need to fundamentally change the way you go about transportation planning, and even housing development as well.”

In response to the rulings, SANDAG noted last Monday that it is the first metropolitan planning body in the state to publish a transportation plan since California issued new rules for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. SANDAG has faced ambiguous guidance on how to predict and prepare for the effects of climate change, the agency said. On whether SANDAG would appeal the decision to the California Supreme Court, “SANDAG received the ruling Monday and is still evaluating the implications,” a statement from SANDAG read. “The SANDAG Board of Directors has not yet been briefed on the ruling. It will be up to the board to assess options and decide how to respond to the court’s decision.”