Paradise holds CEQA scoping meeting on proposed Railroad extension evacuation route

PARADISE — Town of Paradise staff and consultants held a public scoping meeting to begin environmental review of a proposed Railroad extension intended to add an east–west multimodal corridor and improve evacuation access in south Paradise.

Mark Maddox, the town’s public works director and town engineer, opened the meeting by describing the session as an early, public input step in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. “This tonight is about a public scoping meeting for a, evacuation route project. But what I really wanna start off and say that this is your project,” Maddox said, asking residents to submit written comments for formal consideration.

The project team described the Railroad extension as a multi‑phase effort to create new east–west connections between Pence Road and Clark Road (with a narrower focus between Edgewood Lane and Clark Road in early phases). Staff said the long‑term vision from the town’s transportation master plan is to provide a resilient east–west corridor linking existing north–south evacuation routes such as Skyway, Neil and Clark.

Lewis (Louis) Johnson, the town’s supervising project manager, reviewed alignment alternatives and engineering tradeoffs. He said the team has evaluated more than 30 alignment options and that chosen alternatives balance right‑of‑way impacts, constructability (including bridge spans over canyons and Clear Creek), and design standards needed for state and federal review. “Some of them were just because of they were impact houses. Some of them because of, we knew that the terrain was too difficult to make it through,” Johnson said.

Staff emphasized that the alignments shown are preliminary and not final. The presentation described a phased approach: a Phase 1A segment the team said could be funded today (studied from South Libby Road to Edgewood Lane), a Phase 1B connection that staff repeatedly described as currently unfunded, and a Phase 2 segment (Clark Road to South Libby) that was described in the presentation as having funds identified. In different parts of the presentation staff provided multiple figures for funding allocations: at one point Maddox said $22,000,000 was available for Phase 1A and that Phase 2 had $85,000,000; at another point staff described a separate $33,000,000 award through the California Transportation Commission’s Local Transportation Climate Adaptation Program (administered by Caltrans) and a $52,000,000 allocation through Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG‑DR) administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Staff acknowledged the presentation included multiple funding lines and asked the public to rely on posted materials and to submit comments during the formal CEQA scoping period.

Staff said the CDBG‑DR funds are congressionally appropriated disaster recovery funds administered through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the California HCD, intended for infrastructure that supports recovery and resiliency. The project website is townofparadiseroads.com, Maddox said, and written comments submitted through the site or on comment cards would be part of the administrative record. Staff set the CEQA scoping comment deadline as June 23 (staff attributed this date during the presentation).

On right‑of‑way and property acquisition, staff said the town currently does not own many of the parcels in the proposed corridor and that additional right‑of‑way would be required if the project advanced. Maddox said staff are not making eminent‑domain decisions at the scoping stage and that the town’s acquisition approach would generally seek negotiated purchases, with condemnation discussed only as a legal process outside the scoping meeting. “As staff, we can’t speak, as that, but certainly, I have a really positive feeling that no one’s interested in eminent domain,” Maddox said.

Residents raised concerns about traffic, privacy, property values and whether the town was advancing alignments primarily to spend time‑limited funds. Several speakers said they prefer less‑intensive improvements (gravel or gated emergency access) rather than full paved arterial roadways and bridges. For example, John Romagna, a resident who said he reviewed the town’s records, questioned bridge cost estimates he had seen in a public records request and urged the town to obtain stronger independent cost estimates before advancing major construction. “We need the evacuation routes. We already have some roads that could be improved ... But don’t build it like a super highway,” Romagna said.

Other commenters suggested prioritizing capacity improvements to existing bottlenecks such as Skyway, Pentz and Clark roads rather than creating new corridors through rebuilt residential areas. Several residents who live on or near proposed alignments, including Edgewood Lane and Roe Road, urged the town to avoid increasing through traffic and to consider traffic calming or gated emergency access.

Staff described the environmental topics that will be studied under CEQA, including community impacts, transportation and circulation, biological and water resources, cultural resources and cumulative effects. They said a draft environmental document would follow analysis of the scoping comments, with future public hearings and council checkpoints before any project approval, property acquisition or construction. Staff estimated that property acquisition and construction would occur after environmental approval and said their earliest construction estimate included activity in 2027 and a multiyear outlook that referenced 2029 in the presentation materials.

No formal decisions or votes occurred at the meeting; staff said this session was an early public input step in the CEQA process. Written comments submitted during the scoping period, along with technical studies, will shape the draft environmental document and the set of alternatives considered for a preferred alternative if the project proceeds.

Residents and agencies seeking the official project materials, comment instructions and updates were directed to townofparadiseroads.com and to submit comments by mail (Town of Paradise, 555 Skyway, Paradise, CA, attention Louis Johnson) or by email to paradiseroads@townofparadise.com. Staff said additional public engagement and council reviews would follow as the environmental review proceeds.