Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Coming Back From The Quiet

Hey, I'm still here!

I decided to take a break from the blogging world, but trust me - we're not through yet. Keep the month of May in your calendar. Some very important things will be coming out on this site, including some redesign, new marketing and some new features (did someone say podcast?).

I'm jazzed about the next phase of this site, and I hope you readers out there are excited as well.

In the meantime, Susan Luzzaro of the San Diego Reader put out a massive article analyzing the environment of the bay front and the actions of the main players thus far. It's a big read, but let's take a look at some of the important highlights.

But the stadium is not a part of the master plan, nor has its impact on the environment been addressed in the master plan’s environmental impact report.

“It’s beginning to feel like bait and switch,” says Laura Hunter, who works for the Environmental Health Coalition and was a member of the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan Citizens Advisory Committee. “Why are they encouraging the Chargers? The language of CEQA is not benign. It requires analysis of projects that are reasonably foreseeable.” CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, is the law that requires an analysis of environmental impacts from proposed projects, which are often disclosed in environmental impact reports (EIRs). It’s no secret to anyone, including the California Coastal Commission and the State Lands Commission, that Chula Vista is considering a Chargers stadium. If the master plan is submitted without mention of the stadium and without environmental analysis of the stadium’s impact, the commissions may send everyone back to square one.

For any environmentalist looking to knock the stadium plans out of the way, this is their bread and butter. Chula Vista has allowed the Chargers to work on the project without requiring an environmental study thus far. The studies have included financial analysis currently on tap as well as economical studies for the fall, but there is no environmental impact report currently scheduled. The Chargers have acknowledged this, but have not yet made anything happen.

He calls the economic feasibility study “silly and dysfunctional.” He argues that you cannot do a real cost study unless you look at what constraints the project will have to mitigate the environmental impacts. “How much area will you need for a buffer? What would it cost to prevent that light pollution to the J Street Marsh? What kind of trash handling and food storage will be required to avoid attracting feral animals that would kill the marsh wildlife? And what about the cost and the area that it would take to treat the runoff water from the huge parking lot before it goes into the bay. How much room will it all take? How can they compute the cost or what they could earn without knowing the answers to these basic questions?”

The bayfront area where the Chargers propose to build is next to one of the last mudflats in San Diego County. “An infinite number of animals and fish use it,” Peugh says. “It’s all life, it’s not inert. And the area is essential for migratory birds; they are dependent on it as a stepping stone during their long migratory flights.”

Peugh has spoken before about the current stability of the J Street Marsh. According to Peugh, the lights from a stadium could cause major damage to the quality of life, including chemical balance in the water.

Many people think the Chargers are using Chula Vista as a bargaining chip, a public flirtation in which Chula Vista would be the big loser. ... A few days later, in his February 27 column, Canepa interviewed Padres owner John Moores on his “pet topic, the 96-acre Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal,” located in the city of San Diego. Canepa wrote that Mark Fabiani “has said the terminal would be an ideal spot [for a new stadium] because all roads, parking and infrastructure are in place.” Then Canepa quoted Moores on the subject: “ ‘Building a stadium on that site would be great for everybody.’ ”

Mark Fabiani and the Chargers have deal with others offers, both worthwhile and fantasy, about places to play. But until this election season is settled, specifically with the City Attorney, people will wonder if Chula Vista is a barganing chip.

A couple of weeks ago, I linked to an article explaining how each City Attorney candidate feels about the Chargers. As 2008 continues and if 2009 comes with a more "Charger-friendly" attorney, it will be interesting to see how the Chargers modify their strategy concerning the city of San Diego.

No comments:

web analytics hit counter