TalkBaja.com » Baja Mexico Forums » Baja Border Crossing

Border Coalition Worries about Loss of Property
San Diego Union Tribune

2:00 a.m. June 20, 2009

SAN DIEGO — A coalition of border-area businesses and community groups is organizing its response to a draft environmental report of what would be the largest border expansion project in U.S. history.

The Smart Border Coalition was formed several years ago after the federal government began planning what would now be a $577 million expansion of the San Ysidro Port of Entry, the world's busiest land-border crossing.

The group's goal is to minimize the loss of private property because of the expansion. If property owners do lose land, the group wants to make sure the community and owners are justly compensated. Members vow to continue fighting for a port of entry that improves security and border-crossing times but does not harm San Ysidro in the process.

“We have to stop looking at San Ysidro like we have in the past and look at it like the world's busiest land-border crossing that it is,” said coalition member Jason Wells, executive director of the San Ysidro Chamber of Commerce.

The U.S. General Services Administration, the federal government's real estate manager, says growth is outstripping capacity at the port of entry and that it needs to expand, improve efficiency and reduce border wait times.

Wells said the project must take into account the space required to provide needed amenities at the county's busiest transit stop. The area supports a crush of cars, trucks, taxis, jitneys and 12 bus lines in a very small space.

The project might take the land the Greyhound Lines bus station sits on.

“We're losing a lot of property to this project,” said Tom Currie, president of the San Ysidro Chamber of Commerce. “GSA and (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) is giving back to the community very little for what we're losing.”

The draft environmental impact statement was released May 8. The deadline to respond to the 300-plus-page environmental report is June 22.

The coalition says it wants a project that is community-supported.

Ramon Riesgo, who heads the GSA's National Border Station Program, said that because the project is undergoing public review, the GSA is not allowed to comment on the community's concerns.

“This is really the opportunity for the community and everybody else to give us their comments on the project,” Riesgo said. “(The) GSA eagerly awaits the comments.”

About 41,000 cars and trucks, 35,000 pedestrians and 300 buses cross into the United States daily at San Ysidro. The port of entry, which operates around the clock, has 24 northbound and six southbound lanes and one pedestrian crossing in each direction.

The project would increase the number of lanes in each direction. It calls for more secure, state-of-the-art administration buildings. Currently, there is an area where people applying for permits are next to holding cells.

The project also would have a northbound pedestrian processing facility, as well as primary and secondary inspection areas. Interstate 5 as it nears the border would be shifted west to align with Mexico's plan to reopen the old Virginia Avenue-El Chaparral commercial crossing.

The draft environmental report outlines three expansion options. The preferred alternative would involve constructing 210,000 square feet of new facilities.

There would be 31 northbound inspection lanes, six southbound inspection lanes and two southbound pedestrian crossings, including a new one east of I-5. The project would be built in three phases over about a five-year period, with construction beginning as early as September.

The preferred alternative calls for the loss of private property, including the UETA Duty Free Americas store, the Greyhound station and 1,250 parking spaces. Coalition members say the immediate border area would lose 56 percent of its parking spaces.

The second alternative, known as the pedestrian-crossing alternative, is similar to the preferred plan but would not build a second southbound pedestrian crossing.

The third alternative is to build nothing, an option required by federal law to provide a comparison for the project's effects.

Wells said the group has several critical concerns that are “non-negotiable and absolutely necessary for community support.”

The group wants a deck extension from Camino de la Plaza to a new pedestrian bridge. It wants existing businesses and parking included in the project area, and an intermodal transportation and retail center. Finally, the group wants proposed southbound inspection facilities removed from the project because the draft document does not address their effects.

Currie said coalition members have traveled to Mexico City, Sacramento and Washington, D.C., to meet with government leaders. Wells was in Washington in April to meet with Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, and transportation officials to express his concerns about the project.

After the visit, Filner asked that the House Appropriations Committee include language in the port of entry's 2010 funding report that directs the GSA to work with the community on a plan that incorporates its interests.

The GSA hopes to begin construction before the end of the federal government's fiscal year Sept. 30.



By Janine Zúñiga