Jackson Drive Extension Hits Roadblock in Court

A San Diego judge issued a ruling Monday that in effect halts the proposed four-lane extension of a highway through an eastern San Diego urban park, adding a legal roadblock to an already politically vulnerable project.

In a significant victory for environmentalists and neighborhood activists, San Diego Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Miller issued an injunction forbidding the city from doing anything more than seeking federal permits for the project, a 2.4-mile extension of Jackson Drive through Mission Trails Regional Park to California 52.

Because that link is so environmentally sensitive, Miller said, it is unlikely that the city could earn those permits. And he barred the city from going ahead with any other plans for the road, which it has been estimated would cost as much as $90 million.

The decision marked one of the first rulings in California in which a judge stepped in to halt proposed municipal spending because citizens’ groups claimed it could waste money, said lawyers for the loose coalition of activists that brought the lawsuit.

Environmentalists said Monday that they hope the ruling will speed the political demise of the project.

Just last week, at a San Diego City Council committee hearing, the political future of the road was thrown into doubt when two newly elected council members, George Stevens and Valerie Stallings, sharply questioned the need for it.

Backers of the highway have said it would reduce congestion on streets leading to Interstates 8 and 15 in San Diego’s Grantville, San Carlos, Allied Gardens and Del Cerro neighborhoods. Environmentalists said it would jeopardize what has become the nation’s largest expanse of natural open space within city limits.

In November, 1990, the City Council approved the road by a 5-4 margin. But that majority included former Councilmen Wes Pratt and Bruce Henderson--who were replaced in this fall’s elections by Stevens and Stallings.

“Our hope now is that the council sees the wisdom of moving forward with other projects needed in the city--to forget the absurdity of spending so much money on a road that is of little benefit and great environmental damage,” said Linda Michael, a spokeswoman for the Sierra Club, which opposes the extension.

Judy McCarty, the 7th District councilwoman who has championed the project in her district since her first campaign for office in 1985, said Monday that she felt “like a woman who has read the votes” against the project.

Referring to a required annual council vote for the funding of certain transit plans, including the Jackson Drive extension, McCarty said, “If the political reality is that this is going to be de-funded six months from now, let’s end it now, and save money.”

It was not clear Monday how much has been spent on the project already. Officials at the city engineer’s office could not be reached for comment. Lawyers and activists familiar with the project said Monday they believe it was about $2 million.

Plans for the road have been part of the city’s General Plan since 1960. Funding is due to come from a half-cent transportation sales tax that voters approved in 1987.

As approved, the project would run north from Jackson Drive’s existing terminus at Mission Gorge Road to a yet-to-be-built extension of California 52. It would require a 1,600-foot bridge across the San Diego River and shorter bridges over smaller canyons.

The extension would slice through the western section of the 5,740-acre park. Though surrounded by San Diego, Santee and La Mesa, the park supports deer, coyote and mountain lions as well as birds on federal endangered species lists, according to environmentalists.

On Aug. 29, environmental and neighborhood activists sued to stop the road, claiming it would waste taxpayer money and damage the park.

The suit, filed against the city and City Council, was brought by a neighborhood group called Citizens Against the Jackson Drive Extension; by the founder of that group, San Diego State University professor Peter Andersen and by the Mountain Defense League, a group of local environmentalists.

Miller said Monday there is “substantial evidence” that, because of the wetlands and wildlife in the park, the Army Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency would not issue the permits to build the road.

By issuing an injunction, he suggested that it is not sound fiscal policy to keep spending money on the extension while those permits are pursued.

But, Miller said, he could not legally order the city to stop trying for the permits.

“There are not many (judicial) opinions on (fiscal) waste,” said Steve Crandall, a San Diego lawyer who helped bring the suit. “You’ve got to show that a government is exceeding its authority or truly wasting money. And usually governments don’t do that.

“This is one of those unique decisions (with such a finding),” Crandall said. “And that’s what makes it special.”

In January, the same neighborhood and environmental activists filed a first suit seeking a halt to the Jackson Drive extension. That separate suit, which claims that the city did not properly prepare the environmental impact report, is pending, Crandall said.