Is there yet a better option out there for the FMSP entrance?

[I have enormous respect for my friend and frequent "co-conspirator", Dr. Rick Bonart.  Rick has been at the forefront of the land conservation and preservation movements in El Paso for a very long time.  He pre-dates Teschner, Wakeem, Ackerman and other heroes of El Paso's "green revolution". Indeed Bonart along with the late anesthesiologist, Dr. Billy Rogers (for whom Arroyo Park is named), really were the the first instigators in this generation of preserving the mountains and arroyos for their beauty and recreational value.  Rick now serves as a member of the Public Service Board where he has also gained hard-fought respect.  He was the original chairman of the Open Space Committee and then Board.  He is a practicing veteranarian and cares for my two cats, Copernicus and Aristotle.

He has long opposed Option 4, the preferred option of the TPWD - the one which current El Paso TxDOT Czar, Bob Bielek, seems bound to bury.  Bielek has been disingenuous about the project claiming ignorance when necessary about the public process or about the fact that the environmental and park communities have sought a way that would give safe passage into the park as well as a north-south passageway for animals and also for pedestrians and bicyclists. TxDOT uses public forums as window dressing so that they can claim that they got public input while, all of the time, planning to do exactly what they want to do - the public be damned.  They seem to be doing it with Option 4.  Their solution for an animal corridor previously was a extensive tunnel with access only from developed land as if animals would Google and GPS their ways through more suburban sprawl.

Dr. Bonart argues that there may be a better, cheaper, less environmentally destructive way to gain safety and corridor to the State Park and welcomes the additional time for "ongoing review".  He supports his case with recent photos he took showing the height and area involved of the underpasses of the gargantuan Transmountain freeway project. Here is what he has to say]:

 Click image to enlarge.

 Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

"I think continued advocacy for construction of a freeway style intersection (Option 4) at FMSP is not in either the community's or Park's best interest.

"I suggest proponents of a freeway style entrance visit the construction site to fully understand what they are advocating. (See attached photos). Currently there are 4 partially completed  underpasses  at Northwestern, Resler, Plexxar and Paseo. The size and spacing between these structures can be used to approximate what Option 4 will be like.

"These structures are huge. They have completely changed the character of the surrounding area a natural park like environment into a typical urban freeway. They completely divide north from south for pedestrians, wildlife, hikers, and bicyclists. Even without the road bed, the concrete edifice completely blocks the view. The planned signage and lighting once constructed will only further denature the adjacent surroundings.

"Option 4 requires the largest area to build and unnecessarily consumes too many precious acres of open space. Option 4 is overly expensive, five times the cost of better options. 

"True, TPW did pick Option 4, because at the time, Option 4 was the only alternative that  provided a way for pedestrians and wildlife to pass north to south without crossing freeway lanes. However, even this aspect of the Option 4 design is terribly flawed. Because it  forces people and wildlife to cross 4 lanes of access roads. In the photos you can see what the first set of access roads will be like on the south side. There will be a second set on the north. It's ludicrous to pretend this would be the best design for a functional wildlife tunnel. 

"I am thankful there is an ongoing review. I'm certain that a better Option which includes a truly separate pedestrian/wildlife crossing with best practices design, and a more rationally scaled and environmentally compatible structure will emerge. This area deserves better. Something which actually enhances the area and user experience.  

"In short there are better options than either the status quo (Option 6) or Option 4. I would hope those interested will actually visit the site and decide for themselves if they really want another underpass to further decimate the area. What would be preferable is something better that will enhance those acres of open space we fought hard to save."