Carbon Canyon Road S-Curve Zoom Meeting Summary

Last night, CalTrans District 8, which covers the San Bernardino County portion of Carbon Canyon belatedly held a public Zoom meeting to discuss the project to "improve" the S-curves on Carbon Canyon Road, which is California Highway 142, with around 100 concerned residents gathered at the McCoy Equestrian Center Barn for the gathering.  The confab included a relatively brief, pro-forma recitation by CT officials of an overview, background and timeline of the proposed project, which could take up to four years to complete including environmental review, design and construction, while public comment is taking place this month and in July.

As with other projects like this, there are the build and no-build alternatives, but the claim is that the work to widen the S-curves and install retaining walls and other elements is to improve safety, even as the completion of the project would allow more volume because it was made abundantly clear that the ban of trucks of 5 axles or more, implemented a couple of years ago, with several years of concerted action from the cities of Brea and Chino Hills, would almost certainly be rescinded either way, meaning whether the "improvement" was made or not.

Also striking was the reiteration on several occasions by a CT official that this project came about because of public concerns of trucks crossing the centerline striping at the S-curves and so the claim was that this effort to widen the roadway and other aspects was the only real response the agency could make.  The obvious problem with this from the standpoint of those who spoke during the Q&A, considered informal so not recorded for the public record, and the oral comment portion, which was formalized and recorded, is that this was not the reason for the concerns.  

It should be noted that none of the dozens of persons who asked questions or spoke during the meeting, including a former Chino Hills councilmember and mayor, the current mayor and a city official, voiced support for the project.  So, if CT's contentions about concerns from the public were that this project was warranted, why did the public who expressed current concerns agree en masse that this is not what was intended when complaints were registered with the department?

Another remark by a CT official that raised eyebrows was the statement that the project was not intended to add more trucks to traffic on the state highway, but to more broadly improve traffic flow.  As many speakers pointed out, as often as accidents occur at the S-curves—a property owner with expensive cast-iron fencing and walls has, yet again, had these plowed into by a car within the last couple of weeks, and a section at Carriage Hills Lane has been the site of many crashes that have caused power outages throughout the Canyon—the way this section is constructed actually serves to slow most traffic down.  Yet, CT has insisted on adding so many signs, in the belief that this will somehow deter dangerous driving, when only enforcement can mitigate this, that it is almost comical to see how cluttered the roadway has become, yet the behavior continues.

It was also remarked that, while this work may be viewed by the agency as necessary and effective, the isolation of the S-curves from the rest of the state highway seems more than self-defeating.  For example, there are curves in Sleepy Hollow, principally at the east entrance to Rosemary Lane, where trucks routinely cross the centerline and have, in fact, swipes mailboxes and vehicles, while others routinely honk their horns as a warning, but with very limited sight lines.  There is no way to remediate the highway in that location and this is true at another curve to the west under which Carbon Creek passes, while sections in Brea may well involve the same general issues.

Other questions and comments concerned the absolute bare minimum of public notice, the inadequacy of holding a Zoom meeting so that an in-person gathering was requested, the fact that the documents so far prepared were insufficient, the call for a permanent ban on trucks—which CT personnel said would involve the cities going through a similar process to the current one (meaning years of struggle), and more.  One commenters wanted to know who was behind this project in terms of either the complaints registered that led to the interpretation that this work was the best response or who may be lobbying (a common perception is that Amazon, readying to establish a distribution center just outside the canyon on the 142 [the Valencia Avenue portion] in Brea, is behind this) for the work.

Perhaps the most remarkable claim from CT officials was that the ban instituted in the last couple of years was temporary and was always intended to be so.  While City of Chino Hills officials were clear in saying that this was not the case, the response from the department was that it was in the agreement signed by Chino Hills and Brea.  The obvious question is:  what will be the future communications between the municipalities and Cal Trans about this vital issue?

There will, of course, be more to come, but the salient matter right now is for those concerned about this project—and nothing said by CT staff alleviated any concerns, from what this observer heard and saw—this is the time to comment, during this and next month.  There is also the Hope for the Hills campaign against the project

Carbon Canyon Road S-Curve Widening Zoom Mtg on 10 June

A virtual public meeting set up by CalTrans District 8 for the "State Route 142 S-Curve Project," proposing widening at this section along the summit on Carbon Canyon Road in Chino Hills and which would, many are concerned, allow for the rescinding of the large truck ban just recently enacted, has been scheduled on Zoom for Wednesday, 10 June at 5:30 p.m.

You can request to register by contacting: e&pengagement@icf.com.

For anyone living in Carbon Canyon or who regularly uses the state highway, this is a very important part of public input, so please consider joining and expressing concerns because there is no question that this project will be especially invasive if it involved allowing larger trucks again.  This road should not be used as a large truck route, but one wonders if there is pressure to make it one no matter how detrimental it would be to our communities in Brea and Chino Hills, as well as to the Canyon.

If there is such a plan, what is obviously needed is a coordinated response like Hope for the Hills undertook to fight back against the Southern California Edison TRTP transmission lines some 15 years ago.  That movement was successful and it would take the same type of effort to push back against what might be unreasonable and unwarranted project that serves narrow, though deep pocketed, interests at the expense of broader community concerns.

This post was edited following a comment on the Chronicle Facebook page rightly calling for attention to the facts—we would add, as we know them now, pending further revelations.  In the meantime, the CEQA Initial Study may be worth reviewing before the meeting on the 10th.

And, just found this Chino Valley Champion article, as well, note the statement by a CalTrans spokesperson that the ban may be rescinded once the widening project is complete

Carbon Canyon Road S-Curve Widening and the Reversal of the 5-Axle or More Truck Ban

An article by Marianne Napoles in last Saturday's Chino Valley Champion informed readers of plans by CalTrans to, starting in summer 2028, widen the S-curves at the summit along Carbon Canyon Road, which is State Route 142, and it looks as if the reason for doing this was to set the table for a reversal of the ban on trucks with five axles or more on the highway.

This prohibition was years in the making as the cities of Brea and Chino Hills, as well as citizens in both cities, lobbied persistently to persuade CalTrans to enact the policy for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the safety of other drivers because large trucks were continually crossing center lines and entering opposing traffic lanes.

While there are certainly no shortage of violators now, as enforcement is pretty light, the idea of reversing the ban because one section of the highway is being widened has definitely struck a nerve in Chino Hills, as evidenced by the turnout of concerned residents at Tuesday night's Council meeting, even though there were no agenda items relating to the matter.

This meant that it was during general public comment that Carbon Canyon residents took the opportunity to implore the Council to do whatever it could to fight against CalTrans' purported purpose.  Many reasons were cited, including those related to evacuations in case of a wildfire, something, obviously, paramount in many minds given last weekend's 210-acre blaze on the Brea side of the Canyon, along with safety and others.

Because Amazon is in the process of converting a former Bank of America processing center just outside the Canyon on Highway 142 (Valencia Avenue) in Brea, the speculation, naturally, has been that CalTrans' work on the S-curves is at least partially, if not largely (or completely?), based on this project, dubbed the DJT4 Parcel Delivery Facility (on those initials . . . hmmmm).  This lead to some public comments about this possibility.

It was stated that there is a scheduled meeting on 4 May (next Monday) between officials from CalTrans and the City of Chino Hills, so, of course, it'll be very interesting to see what comes out publicly afterward and then what steps will be taken for public comment.  As another commenter said, CalTrans did not notify many residents about this early stage work because it followed an absolute minimum of 500 foot-distance from the work area for notification, but any reasonable effort at transparency would extend that to a fair distance given the size of the Carriage Hills and Summit Ranch tracts, in or near which council members Ray Marquez and Peter Rogers reside.

A concluding point is that one speaker observed that, even if the S-curves were widened to more easily accommodate larger trucks, this would not be the case for Sleepy Hollow, where any such attempt would have to involve condemnation through eminent domain.  Those of us who live in that community (including those who have a roadside view) know how often trucks cross the centerline, have to honk to warn oncoming vehicles or, on occasion, hit residential property.

Widening the S-curves would change nothing in this part of the Canyon and, therefore, pose unacceptable risks to residents and drivers.  We'll see how all this plays out as the project moves forward, but anyone who drives Carbon Canyon Road on a regular basis, beyond those who live in the Canyon, should be aware and concerned about this and find a way to get engaged.

The Champion article states that a public hearing can be requested by 10 May by emailing CalTrans at: D8.1M780.Comments@dot.ca.gov or writing to CalTrans District 8, Attn: Hannah Duarte, Senior Environmental Scientist, 464 W. Fourth Street, MC-820, San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400.

The Chronicle will try to keep updated on the development of this project and share what it learns.