HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1972-6409RESOLUTION N0. 6409
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA SUPPORTING AB 584 WHICH WOULD DELETE TFiE
SOUTHERLY PORTION OF FREEWAY ROUTE 125, AND URGING
ITS ADOPTION BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does herebty
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on
Tuesday, April 18, 1972 heard a presentation of a statement by
Assemblyman Wadie P. Deddeh explaining AB 584, introduced by Wadie
P. Deddeh, a copy of which statement is attached hereto and incor-
porated herein by reference as if set forth in full, and
WHEREAS, said Assembly Bill would delete a portion of
Route 125, south of Route 54 interchange to the junction of State
Highway 75, east of San Ysidro, and
WHEREAS, said proposal has long been urged by the Environ-
mental Control Commission of the City of Chula Vista, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista after
considering the statement of Assemblyman Deddeh and the recommendations
of the Environmental Control Commission concurs in said statement and
in the provisions of AB 584.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby state its strong support of AB 584,
as introduced by Assemblyman Wadie P. Deddeh, and urges its adoption
by the Legislature of the State of California.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby directs
the staff of the City to closely watch the progress of AB 584 in
Assembly proceedings and advise the City Council as to whether or
not a presentation to the Assembly Transportation Committee should
be made at such time as said Bill is heard by said Committee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula Vista be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward
certified copies of this resolution to Assemblyman Wadie P. Deddeh,
Senator James R. Mills, and all other members of the San Diego County
Legislative Delegation and to the Honorable Mayors and City Councils
of the Cities of the County of San Diego, and to the Board of Super-
visors of the County of San Diego.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
--
Thomas D. Hamilton, Jr., Mayor George D.Lindberg, City Attorney
ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 25th day of April , 19'78,
by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: CaunC~.~men Hobel, Hamilton, Hyde, Egdahl, Scott
NAYES: Caune~.2men None
ABSENT: Caune~2men None
i
ATTEST ~~ ~
Cti~y C en
S`~ATE OF CALIFORNIA )
::GviVTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss .
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, J~NNI~ Mo ~ULASZ, C~.~y C2enlz a~ the C~.~y a~ Ch.u2a V~.~~a,
Ca.~~.~ann.tia, a0 H~R~Liy C~R7IFy ~h.a~ the abase and ~aneya~.ng ~.~ a ~u.~2,
~nue and canned cagy a~
and ~G~a~ the dame hay nab been amended an ne~ea.~ed~.
aAT~a:
Cti~y Chen
5`f11'l'I:~11;N'I' f~Y ASS1'.M131.~1'1/1111~! WI~I):IL: !'. 1~1~:1)Ui;JI
'77th I)i si_rict~. Chula V_i_:~ta, C<ll i(c~tr~i,l
Cllairnl~ln Asac~nl]~l.y Committee on `!'ran:cpol'tation
Sub:jeri_: A~, :~cl~l (Deddeh) - llc~]_c~tion oi~ port-i.on of I:outc ]?5,
Suul_.h elf JZoritc~ ~>%l, inl-c.~rch~n~lclu Ix~ jtulrl.i.on o[ ~,t ~ll.c~ Ltiyhw<ly
7`>, 1?u:.L cif -,.111 '~5;i~]l~i)
if39 hn <lct. i-.o ~lmcnd Sc~c. ti cans ~ 53.1 and ;? ~, ; . F~ o ~ thc~ Strrc,t:, rlrld
II.i(~(11\ti'~-y:~ L~J~I~', r~i'l~lt"l.ll~1 t0 :~ti1tC' ]l].C(tt\v~lyti.
1 Intro;]ucc~d , t~~~bru~lry ?S, 137?.., ~~s:>_i_gnc:~l t:.o A:-~sc~m]~l. y `t'r~in:.po.rtatiorl
2 Conlnlittee. At3 5£34 would limit the construction o1 proposed
3 Route 1?5 to be devc~lopc'd No r. t]1 of the Route 54 interchange.
~l Over. l_c~n ye<u~s Aldo p_lannc~r_, in t-he ~~tat.<> llivision of Ilighways
developed preliminary designs for an 8-_lane freeway to be built
6 from La ~yl~~sa, through Lemon Grove, past Sweetwater Lake, and
7 Otay l:,ake, swinging South and West. to the pr.opos•ed I~lster.n
f; c~xtcnsion. oil: State 75 just East of Sarl Ysidro. The r~ortion of
<<) frcc~\~~ay ~~outal of Route `-]~ to t:lle junction o.E 75 would today
~.p `cost approximately 25 to 30 million dollars to complete. When
t. 1.actually constructed the cost would be much higher. Ten years
t 2 ago when plans were d~•vF~]_oped the area of Otay Mesa was agricu].-
i3 tura.l and _l.ow density. The area is sti1.:1 ayricu].tural. and .low
t-1 dc~nsit~•.
t S Route 1.25 woulcl at- best be compl.nt.ed in 1984-85, some
t ~ twelve years in the future. }.~i.ght-. of W~1~r purcl:usc_~ , would begin
i7 at tl'~e l~lte+r t~~lrt= of- t_-h.i.s c]e~c~ld~~ 01: thc~ seventies.
i,f1 Route 1:?5 jaou]~1 uict~ct the ;~~m<~twater F:^gional Park,
t_9 with an c~levatc~c' fr:~i~\v,1y. In my juclgm~nt, ttlis would seriously
?p damage the ecology. L'ederal funds would not be lost on this
~1 projclct, they would be ~:!iv~lrtccl to other p2-ior. i.tics in the
~2 state highways ~,ystrm.
~~~~
?113 ~>tt~l 11n ,1~ t t: El ~1mE~ud ~~~~~ t.i on:: ? `13.1 and :?':)3 . 6 o E' this ~;treei.s
:1nE~i tli..7?1w,ly:; Co~}~,, rclai;iug to state }-u_ghways.
Tf Rout.e 1.7.5 were compl.etc~d there wou_id be ?4 lanes
c)f C~Ic)1'Ih--,':c)ullc i1t•t~w.1\~ I1,11-( is within .t 7 nti Icy <Ii::i,tnt•t• ,)c•rc):t:t
L})u la V'i~;t~l.
-111 :? t o .?'; ~'i~,l rs t}lc~rc~ w i ] l ]x;• I i, 1 ~ul~_~r; c) f Nort.lt-~iou t-It
t.r,lffic tllroucill llli~ Sc~ut11 B~~y on tnt~~.rst~(lc 5 ~1rlE.? £1 (1`~i. I{
l~'S wclr(~ ronsi.r.uctc~il mor(~ land would bc~ rcmovcd from the public
tel:-- roll ~In~l surrounding ar_ca:~ woulc] bc~ taxed more. `t'his in
tiPCect would cause an escal_lation of property taxes in other
~I1_~t~;ls l o nt;lk~• up {.hc~ tl i. f=fE>>_~cnc~c in t~lx(,s not collected because
of t~llc~ freeway, and this would directly affect every property
owner i n the County .
Growth ~lnd (_:xhan:~i_c~n or c)t~Ey I~i~~sa znd tllc Brown Field
c1T't"'~1 1"lave not: dc~v~:+opcc] as ral~lclly as ant1.C]_pr-lte'Cl. Th(~ net~(i
tUi" ROLItE' ]. ?5 1_S IlOt c1S St]"Ollg today aS It nllg}lt have
bE~en whE-gin dE.~signc~d years ago. IIrown I'i.eld was not developed
a5 a major ~.u.r.po.rt", the mc~dic_aa_ correctional f~lci_].i.ty wets not
dE:vE;.lop(~d, and cl seconc-? entrance into Me~cico could be served
by Stzli-c~ hiE7hw1}'.75 end Intcr:;;t~ltc~ 13O'x.
With the appl'oachi_ng construction of ] 25 and 54 in the
Lemon Grove a.nd Spring Valley area a decision fo.r or against
c<xnhlct ic)n OI Ro11t~, 1~)'i, ;;oath <>f~ lZOUI-.c~ '1~1 nnl~:t. 1)~~
,1. 111 i1].1'',i'd l'.11:1 V('~11". It ~l C}(?C1Slon _1S nOt r<~ache`c.l th1.S year
the l:ou to ~'?;~:; i.gu<~cl for 1 "' ~1 anc? 5~1 Nor tl1 o F Swc~i~ twa ter.
Lake will. be t~ixf•d and it will bc~ di.fficu]t to reverse.
Thc1 const'r1]ction of this frc~ewrly can helve such an i.m1~~1ct.
On I:}ltd fllllld"t .` i)f E)I_ily ~)Ilcl c~tay MC'S<7 ill"C'il ~}lilt cl C.1i`C:L::I On
should 11E~ nl~ldo by individuals subject to and responsible to
tlir_~ public. Publ:i.c h.~~ar.i.ngs, and public decisions should
mE~~lsure thc~ worth of_ t_hi.s freeway.
i;'C ~~/
1.
:?
3
:~
r~
~~
7
f3
~~
10
is
12
]_
a ~]
15
rage 3
1113 `if~i~ 7~n act. to am~_?r~d Sec~l:,i.on~, :)':~~.1 ~inil ?`>3.E, of tl~c ~,tT-e~~tst
,~n~l l[ic~l~way:; Co<1~~, rcl,_itinct to :;t~il.~~ ]~=i~~hway:;.
Wc~ Illll:;t ask our<;el.vc~s ho~•~ much of~ our. cstllctic environment
must. be lo:_~t to >ave a f_ew minutes of- t.r~vc-1 time. ~r'c must: ~~sk
ourse.l~~c~s i f ~.e wish to use consumc'~- t=axes to build freeways in
~-~~nu~te, ~zcl~~ icul t ur~i 1 ,~r~~as only t-.o i nvi tt, url,ail ~lrowi li ~tnci
~icvelopm~~nt acid the inlic_~rcnt _lial~_1_itir~_> oL a lcir~~c r_>opul~lt.ion
7 nCreil Sh .
Continuance of Mans to Ltlilcl Route ].?5 would be an
open invit~tt_ion t.o urban sprawl. over thc~ open spaces to the
f;~~s1-_ of Chula C~i.sta. The future of tllc quality o.E life. in
Cali forma may r~~sid~~ in the: solution of Transr~ortation Qroblems.
Currc>>Zt.. 1-r~~e~.~~ty=~ and Ltiture frc~~_ur~iys should lie thought of as
cleinents in a balanced transportation system, f~iass transit,
rapid transit, and other forms of people movers should be
incorporated into a transportation system that meets more
needs than fr~~~~ways.
~'~°~~9