|
February
2002 Update
This is a pretty complex time in the overall grand scheme that
is UC Merced. The UC Regents have certified the EIR, but despite
the rhetoric otherwise, they cannot begin Phase I construction
without taking huge legal and fiscal risks. The project still
requires federal permits and these regulations are far more
onerous than the public disclosure
requirements of CEQA under which the current EIR was prepared.
They could be denied permits and the taxpayers of the State of
California would end up the proud owners of three buildings on a
golf course in the middle of nowhere.
Since this project will have more impact on vernal pools and
endangered species habitat than any other project previously
permitted, moving forward on Phase I without the federal permits
required to complete the project is a huge gamble and a violation
of the public trust.
Certification of the FEIR
The University of California Regents certified the final EIR
for the campus Long Range Development Plan on January 17, 2002.
The vote was unanimous and was preceded by a committee meeting in
which the only discussion of environmental concerns was one regent
joking about how many trees would be cut down to build the campus.
Certification of the EIR trigged a 30 day statute of limitations
for legal challenge of the EIR. Stay tuned!
Just after certification of the EIR, the University announced
that they would be postponing construction until summer in order
to have a better idea of the federal permitting hurdles. This
delay is actually necessary to avoid an "irreversible or
irretrievable commitment of resources" in direct violation of
the Federal Endangered Species Act. The project must have US Fish
and Wildlife Service permission before moving forward, and that
process is triggered by the 404 Permit Application.
404 Permit Application
The University recently resubmitted their 404 Permit
Application to the US Army Corps of Engineers. The original
application was returned to UC as incomplete and the Corps asked
for additional information on impacts to wetlands and endangered
species.
A 404 Permit under the Clean Water Act is required before
wetlands such as vernal pools can be filled by construction
activities. The Clean Water Act regulations presume that there is
a less environmental damaging alternative and the project
applicant must prove otherwise. The permit is required before the
University can build beyond the first phase on the golf course. If
the permit is granted, the university will destroy the most vernal
pools ever destroyed by one project.
An thumbnail overview of the permitting
process is available as are the actual statutes
and regulations pertaining to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act, the federal Endangered Species Act, and the agencies with
jurisdiction over their implementation and enforcement.
Early
July 2001 Update
Four separate environmental review processes are being
conducted for this project. Additionally, several of these are
being performed consecutively in violation of the resource
protection laws. We continue to believe that full disclosure of
the environmental impacts of the proposed UC Merced project can
only occur if a joint EIR/EIS is prepared for the entire project
including the campus, campus community, Campus Parkway and the
NCCP/HCP.
Upcoming Document Review
Periods
We are anticipating several environmental documents in late
July or early August 2001, these include two draft Environmental
Impact Reports (DEIRs) and a Section 404 Permit Application.
- One DEIR will be for the UC Long Range Development Plan (UC
LRDP) and the site specific impacts of Phase I development on
the Merced Hills Golf Course.
- The second DEIR will be for the University Community Plan
and related infrastructure. These CEQA documents have a 45 day
public comment public comment period. We anticipate a
September 14, 2001 deadline for comments.
- The Section 404 Permit Application will be for the UC's
preferred alternative on the Virginia Smith Trust lands and
will trigger a federal Endangered Species Act Section 7
consultation. The 404 Permit Application will have a 30 day
public comment period and we anticipate a mid-October
deadline.
Note that the Campus Parkway project reissued its Notice of
Preparation (NOP) back in April. The scaled down project will not
connect with the proposed campus. The DEIR/DEIS for the campus
parkway is expected in early summer 2002.
A Flawed NCCP Process
The County of Merced, University of California, Department of
Fish and Game, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have entered
into a Planning Agreement to do regional conservation planning in
eastern Merced County. The ultimate goal of the agreement is the
preparation of a Natural Communities Conservation Plan slash
Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP). While we applaud efforts to
do conservation planning, we note that the agreement stipulates
that the proposed UC Merced campus and related infrastructure be
permitted as an interim project. Additionally any conservation
easements purchased now will go toward mitigation. So all of the
damage and all of the mitigation will occur in advance of
performing the scientific assessment required for good regional
conservation planning. This makes the proposed NCCP/HCP an after
the fact document to justify planning decisions based on political
expediency. See also the Proposal
for Science Advisors and the California
Native Plant Society's comments.
Late February
2001 Update
This section of the web site has languished for
the past two months due to the urgency of public comment letters
and other matters. Briefly, I will attempt to bring the issue up
to date so that the information presented here roughly coincides
with the change in project scope announced in the newspapers and
the recent Notices of Preparation (NOPs) of Environmental Impact
Reports (EIRs) issued by both the University of California and the
County of Merced.
A New Campus Site
Back in December 2000, the University of California received a
wetland delineation of the ~200 acre Merced Hills Golf Course in
the southwest corner of the Virginia Smith Trust. Since these
lands are already developed and contain only a very small acreage
of wetlands, the UC believes it can begin building here without a
Section 404 permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers. While that
may be technically correct, the apparent piecemealing of the
project to avoid a thorough LEDPA (least environmentally damaging
practicable alternative) analysis is in violation of several state
and federal resource protection laws. Regardless, the UC has issued an NOP for the
EIR for this project.
The new project will include a core campus of 910
acres, a campus reserve area of 340 acres, and a nature preserve
area of 750 acres. All except the 200 acre Merced Hills Golf
Course are on high quality vernal pool landscape on Virginia Smith
Trust lands... The UC is planning to build its first
three buildings on the golf course with only CEQA approval. Once
these are in place, they will claim overriding economic and
political considerations and will undoubtedly be allowed to then build
on the adjacent vernal pools and endangered species habitat.
This new plan is a flagrant disregard of the intent of our
resource protection laws and the public process. They cannot and
should not be allow to build anything until a thorough and comprehensive environmental
analysis is conducted for the full project. This includes impacts to the full
910 acre campus footprint, the proposed new town, and the infrastructure
including the Campus Parkway.
Please consider writing to the UC,
the Governor, and the Secretary of the Resources Agency to express
your concerns that they appear to be steamrolling over both the
environmental laws and good planning concepts. Additionally,
comments on the NOP are due on March 19th. If you write to anyone,
please provide VernalPools.Org with a copy so that we can be sure
it makes the administrative record.
A New Campus Community Site
The County of Merced has also filed an NOP to
complete an EIR for the proposed community to support the new
campus site. Their new location for the town is generally to the
south of the Merced Hills Golf Course. This proposed location,
while generally not on the vernal pool landscape, will consume
prime ag land in violation of the UC - County of Merced joint
statement of principals regarding development of the UC Merced campus. Comments on the
NOP are due no later than March 19th.
It is important that people commenting on County
of Merced documents realize that they have been less than exemplary
in fulfilling the public process. They need to be reminded that it
is their duty as public servants and a lead agency to fully engage
the public in all land use decisions. Currently under
contention are a poorly documented mining project which is related
to the UC Merced campus and a General Plan Amendment which they
are trying to pass in piecemeal fashion via a Negative Declaration
under CEQA.
A Campus Parkway
The NOP comment period for the Campus Parkway
project expired at the end of January. Most commented that this
project is part of the UC Merced campus and cannot be separated
from it for the purposes of permitting and environmental impacts
assessment. Currently, we are awaiting a decision from the US Army
Corps of Engineers as to whether or not this project has
independent utility (necessary whether or not the UC
Merced campus is developed).
This major highway, originating along Highway 99
well south of Merced and terminating at Lake Yosemite will have
significant direct and cumulative impacts on eastern Merced
County. Additionally, if it is not specifically intended to serve
the UC Merced campus, then it will facilitate growth in areas not
currently planned for growth in either the County of Merced or
City of Merced general plans. We hope that the Corps will agree
with our assessment that this project does not have independent
utility. However, since the UC and the County have filed NOPs to
develop nearby areas, we expect to have the environmental review
of this project run concurrently with the other aspects of the UC
Merced development.
A March 1st Alternatives Analysis
On March 1st, the University of California released a document
entitled UC Merced Comprehensive Alternatives Analysis. This was done amid quite
a bit of fanfare and a nine page press release including quotes from dignitaries.
As far as we have been able to determine, this document serves no regulatory
purpose. This is not the alternatives analysis required under CEQA for their
pending EIRs. This is not the LEDPA analysis required under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. On the surface, it appears to be a mini site selection process
based on specific urban development plans already included in the Merced General
Plan.
Many many questions and very few logical answers come to mind...
If this doesn't further their permitting process, why bother? Is there a
political or perhaps funding agenda here? If it is an attempt to reevaluate the
site selection process, why was it restricted to only previously approved
development sites within Merced County? What about sites in Fresno and Madera
County? How can they claim that the Alternative 6 will have no impacts to
natural resources... the campus is proposed to be 910 acres, the golf course is
less than 200, and the rest of the parcel is covered with vernal pools and
endangered species habitat? Do the math!
We see this as only the most recent attempt by the UC and County
to piecemeal the planning process, circumvent the resource protection laws, and
thumb their noses at public participation. When are we going to see a complete
and comprehensive analysis of all environmental impacts (including air and
water) and a thorough look at which sites would most alleviate those
impacts?
Original
Overview Page
| 
