At times, the reasoning by staff at San Diego’s Development Services Department gets so twisted, it’s difficult to recognize what language is being spoken.
Many Point Lomans know about the proposed project for 1004 Rosecrans, formerly occupied by the San Diego County Credit Union, at the intersection of Rosecrans and Talbot.
It is currently under review by the San Diego Development Services Department for a proposed four-story, 56-unit apartment development with 1,700 square feet of first-floor commercial space. There also would be basement parking with up to 45 spaces — for commercial tenants only.
It’s been on the radar by many in the Peninsula, particularly the new group, Protect Point Loma — and by the just-formed San Diego Community Coalition — because the project violates so many rules, norms and laws (just take the 30-foot height limit for example). Purchased by North Star Homes, it has been the focus of scrutiny by many. And community members have voiced opposition to the project’s height, scope and potential effects on traffic and parking in the area.
As many know, the site was a gas station before the credit union was there, raising caution about the soil. Records show that six underground gasoline storage tanks and one underground storage tank for used oil were removed from the property in 1992.
The Pt Loma-OB Monthly reports:
When the site was redeveloped for the bank building, the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health and Quality provided regulatory oversight of groundwater and soil investigations and a risk assessment from 2009 until 2014, when the case was closed.
But according to the California State Water Resources Control Board, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board has reopened the case because of the proposed change in use from commercial to residential.
“At the time of closure, residual contaminated soil was left in place beneath the property,” the case summary states. “A soil management plan is required to ensure any contaminated soil encountered during redevelopment is not a threat to site workers or nearby residents and the contaminated soil is sent to the appropriate facility.”
A reassessment of the site data is underway. As of yet, no corrective actions have been proposed.
Yet, DSD “spokesman Richard Berg said residual soil contamination may exist at the property, but he added the project can move forward in conjunction with the assessments.”
“Staff’s review will include, but is not limited to, compliance with regulations that govern parking, landscaping, fire protection, structural and mechanical systems, plumbing and more,” Berg said. “It will also include an analysis of whether the project complies with all applicable planning and zoning regulations.
“Currently, all review disciplines have completed their reviews for [the project]. Additional documents and information are required to continue the review process, however. A building permit will be issued when the project demonstrates conformance with all applicable regulations of the San Diego Municipal Code.”
And here’s the kicker. Berg asserted that because the project is being reviewed ministerially (without public hearings), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which requires public entities to identify and disclose potential environmental impacts of their actions, does not apply in this case.
This is an example of outrageous reasoning, very Orwellian — and Trumpian. Normally, a project this size with this history would have to be scrutinized very carefully, but under Mayor Gloria’s absurd ADU and “Complete Communities” logic, it requires only a ministerial review. And thus, presto! An environmental review doesn’t have to be made.
Nobody has to learn about any health risks or dangers to locals — or the children in the elementary school next door to the proposed project. This doesn’t even meet the smell test.
Point Lomans cannot accept this. The project should have an environmental review, a public hearing where residents and businesses can contest its safety and where Water Quality Board staff can express their points.
The logic behind this assertion is so mired in inconsistencies, that’s it is plain to see how wrong it is. But it’s your city in action.
This is beyond outrageous. All of these new Collaborative Teams— HELP! One thought, maybe new! At the May 1 meeting at the Planning Commission a seated member asked about a committee called the “encoding, or coding committee”. The City Attorney on the stage said that ‘encoding’ committee was activated when needed, then shut down. Comments from the members indicated that it would be good to activate this committee so that the codes could be better understood as they moved forward with ADU and JADU. So here is what I am seeing and hearing. Someone looks out of their window and sees the land being graded and soon a structure pops up like a weed on Miracle-Gro. No one knew, because the NEW ministerial laws bypass local notice requirements. By the time neighbors KNOW it is too late, the city has handed out permits like treats on Halloween, and collected who knows how much money from Big Corporations! Is this where we say, STOP, NOT IN ANYONE’S BACK YARD? I think so!
Term limits have the disadvantage of politicians needing to be upwardly mobile to stay in Politics. If they love the game, City Council members become San Diego County Commissioners, or State Assembly members, who then can move on to State Senators. However, the more upwardly mobile look at the US Congress or Senate. And some see themselves as the Governor of California. It seems to the people who elected them that doing the will of the people is the last thing on their minds. I hope that this time, they will see what their appointed Planning Commission saw: the new interpretation of state law is destroying all San Diego neighborhoods. This project is an example.
So what do we do now, is there any action left to be taken
In North Park’s fight with the City re: Save 30th. Street Parking, the CEQA website specifically for 30th. St., was not there, and that was a part of the lawsuit. However, in looking up other street reconfigurations CEQA filings submitted by SD Planning Dept. were so non-committal they read like there would be no major changes, when it reality parking was removed, and the streets were reconfigured. City of SD has learned how to game the CEQA system by being very non-descriptive on planned work. Frequently there’s no mention of negative impacts to businesses, air quality, traffic congestion. The City of SD submits CEQA filings that are very loosey goosey and it seems Sacramento doesn’t really give a hoot. CEQA, seems to be a useless effort.
WHY IS A CEQA NOT REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT? HERE’S WHAT ONLINE SAYS ABOUT CA CEQA REQUIREMENTS. So has the City watered down the text on the CEQA forms so it looks like this project is a big nothing and won’t impact the public’s environment???
“The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a state law that requires public agencies in California to identify and disclose the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects. It also mandates that agencies avoid or mitigate these impacts if feasible.
Here’s a more detailed explanation:
Purpose:
CEQA’s primary goal is to ensure that state and local agencies consider the potential environmental consequences of their actions before approving projects or committing to a course of action.
Requirements:
CEQA requires public agencies to:
Identify potential environmental impacts.
Analyze these impacts.
Develop measures to avoid or mitigate significant impacts.
Disclose the project’s potential environmental effects to the public.
CEQA Documents:
Depending on the project and its potential impacts, CEQA may require public agencies to prepare various documents, such as:
Initial Study: A preliminary analysis to determine if an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration (ND) is needed.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR): A detailed document analyzing the potential environmental impacts of a project, including mitigation measures and alternatives.
Negative Declaration (ND): A document stating that a project will not have a significant impact on the environment.
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND): A document stating that a project will not have a significant impact on the environment after mitigation measures are implemented.
Public Involvement:
CEQA encourages public participation in the environmental review process, providing opportunities for the public to comment on environmental documents and project proposals”.