Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 2002/12/07 Notice is hereby given that the Chair of the Redevelopment Agency has called and will convene a special meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council, Saturday, December 1, 2002 at 9:00 a.m., at the Chula Vista High School Cafeteria, 820 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA to consider, deliberate and act upon the following: Æ.~(!i?d£L ~ff? ~".L-::; -.-..;;::- CIN OF CHUlA VISTA SATURDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2002 CHULA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL CAFETERIA 9:00 A.M. 820 FOURTH AVENUE SPECIAL .JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Agency/Council Members Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas; Chair/Mayor Padilla ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council/Redevelopment Agency on any subject matter within the Council/Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City Council/Redevelopment Agency from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Agency on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. BUSINESS 1. "SHARE YOUR VISION" FOR CHULA VISTA'S MID-BAYFRONT - The City and Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista will host a public workshop to obtain input on future development of the Mid-Bayfront. The 126-acre site is located within the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area, generally north of Lagoon Drive (F St.). we~ of Bay Blvd., & east of the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. The meeting will be facilitated by Sam Gennawey with MIG consultants in accordance with an agenda that will be distributed to the public at the meeting. [Community Development Director] ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to an adjourned meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on December 10, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting in the City Council Chambers. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodates to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency for specific information at (619) 691-5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf ITDD) at 1619) 585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired. Redevelopment Agency, December 7, 2002 Page 2 ~~f?- :;----:: -- - -- - -.- -- CllY OF CHUlA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT dB City of Chula Vista 1IJ'" MidBayfront Community Outreach Saturday, January 11, 2003, 9:00 a.m. Norman Park Senior Center 270 F Street, Chula Vista 1 Call to Order Roll Call Oral Communications 2 Welcome and Introductory Comments 3 Review the City of Chula Vista's Criteria for MidBayfront Area 4 Review of December 7. 2002 Community Meeting and Discussion 5 Presentation and Discussion of the Opportunity Areas and Options 6 Summary Comments 7 Adjournment at Noon 276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910' (619) 691-5047' FAX (619) 476-5310 @"'«,".O""'.q.,.",~" GI: GI: GI: GI: GI: GI: GI: t:: t:: t:: t:: t:: t:: t:: ,g : ~ ,g: ~ ,g; ~ ,g; ~ 0: ~ 0: ~ 0: ~ 11.:11. 11.;11. 11.:11. 11.:11. f!.I! f:.I! f¡.I! ..... CIS III 0 Q. e Q.; ,.. S c:: ~ Q "'0 e .!!! N ~I~ ~> :t """ ...'" ..... u ... 'lJl 6~ ~ e ~ Q GI CI'I Q "' :1 U ,.. .s c:: c:: CI'I e ..., ~ !I "" :s - -- ./ ";/ \ Agenda January 11,2003 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. . Call to Order . Roll Call . Oral Communications During this period of oral communications, the public may not comment on matters relating to the MidBayfront pro;ect. . Welcome and Introductory comments. . Review the City of Chula Vista's Criteria for MidBayfront area. . Review of December 9,2002 Community Meeting and discussion. . Presentation and Discussion of the Opportunity Areas and Options. . Summary Comments City of Chula Vista MidBayfront Criteria The City supports development of the site provided it meets the following criteria: . Provides public access. . Protects adjacent sensitive species and habitats. . A quality project that will visually enhance and economically support the local community. . Economically feasible. Page 1 Basic Options For the 11 Opportunity Areas described here there are some Basic Options. The basic options are described here in some detail. Due to the constraints applicable to some of the areas, there may be some variations for some of the specific areas. Option A . Do Nothing . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the area in its current state. . No restoration, enhancements or maintenance. . No removal of debris or exotic species other than for public safety. . The City will have to devote resources to compensate the landowner (funding sources could include grants from public and private sources). . A change to the current entitlements will be required. . This option does not allow for public access. Option B . Biological Restoration . Restore the area as Upland Maritime Succulent Scrub habitat which consists of drought tolerant deciduous, soft-leaved shrubs (typically dominated by California sagebrush, California buckwheat, lemonadeberry, California Encelia, and Cholla). . Restoration would include creating biologically sensitive filtration areas to curtail urban run-off and removal of non-native plant species. . This option does not allow for public access. Page 3 Option ( - Biological Restoration with Trails . Restore the area as Upland Maritime Succulent Scrub habitat which consists of drought tolerant deciduous, soft-leaved shrubs (typically dominated by California sagebrush, California buckwheat, lemonadeberry, California Encelia, and Cholla). . Restoration would include creating biologically sensitive filtration areas to curtail urban run-off and removal of non-native plant species. . This option provides for one or more low-impact trails which create access close to the Bay and the Refuge. Residential Development Options . A cascade or terraced approach to building heights with the tallest placed furthest away from Bay and Refuge (maximum height to be set by the option). . The other buildings will decrease down incrementally until reaching the minimum height. . Residential units will be designed to minimize direct and indirect impacts to adjacent biological resources. . Additional amenities could include children's playgrounds. Page 4 Area 1: The Refuge Edge Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the Do Nothing area in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . Restore the area as Upland Maritime Biological Restoration Succulent Scrub habitat. . For complete description see page 3. Option C: . This option will allow for a single Biological Restoration low-impact trail that is sensitive to the with Limited Trails refuge. It may include overlooks to the Refuge. . For complete description see page 3. Area 2: The Bayfront Edge Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the Do Nothing area in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . Restore the area as Upland Maritime Biological Restoration Succulent Scrub habitat. . For complete description see page 3. Option C: . For complete description see page 3. Biological Restoration . This option will allow for a single with Limited Trails low-impact trail that is sensitive to the refuge. It may include overlooks to the Bay. Option D: . This option provides the expanded Expanded Boardwalk opportunity for public access to the and Trail System edge of the Bay. . The boardwalk structure will be ADA compliant, will have benches, interpretive signage, and other amenities. . The area surrounding the boardwalk will be planted with native vegetation. Page 5 Area 3: The Northern Transition Zone Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the Do Nothing area in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . For this area, this option will allow for Biological Restoration a system of low-impact trails with Trails overlooking the refuge. . For complete description see page 3. Option C: . Commonly referred to as a passive Passive Park neighborhood park. . This area will be designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized recreation activities such as picnicking, walking, jogging, and biking. . It may include a children's playground. . Uses not allowed include soccer, baseball, tennis, basketball and other similar activities. Option D: Low Scale Residential . For this area, low-scale residential Development or development is defined as 1 to 2- Visitor Serving story attached or detached residential units. Residential . Residential units will be designed to minimize direct and indirect impacts to adjacent biological resources. . These residential units could also be part of a resort residential complex with links to a hotel or conference center. . Additional amenities could include children's playgrounds. Page 6 Area 4: The Southern Transition Zone Note: Any opotion for Area 4 will include an appropriate restoration between the bay and the F & G Street Marsh to improve the functionality of the biological habitat. Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the Do Nothing area in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . For this area, this option will allow for Biological Restoration a system of low-impact trails with Trails overlooking the refuge. . For complete description see page 3. Option C: . Commonly referred to as a passive Passive Park neighborhood park. . This area will be designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized recreation activities such as picnicking, walking, jogging, and biking. .It may include a children's playground. . Uses not allowed include soccer, baseball, tennis, basketball and other similar activities. Option D: Low Scale Residential . For this area, low-scale residential Development or development is defined as 1 to 2- Visitor Serving story attached or detached residential units. Residential . Residential units will be designed to minimize direct and indirect impacts to adjacent biological resources. . These residential units could also be part of a resort residential complex with links to a hotel or conference center. . Additional amenities could include children's playgrounds. Page 7 Area 5: The Bayview Zone Option A: . For this area, this option will allow for Biological Restoration a system of low-impact trails with Trails overlooking the bay. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . Design of a low-scale resort-style Visitor Serving Resort hotel. . The resort's orientation will be towards the Bay and will provide a full range of services including restaurants and meeting space. . The design of the resort will be sensitive to the surrounding habitats and will provide significant public access near the Bay. . Design could incorporate sustainable best management practices to the greatest extent possible. Option C: . For this area, low-scale residential Low-scale Residential development is defined as 2-story Development attached and semi-attached residential units that are professionally maintained and managed. . Residential units will be designed to minimize direct and indirect impacts to adjacent biological resources. . These residential units could also be part of a resort residential complex with links to a hotel or conference center. . Additional amenities could include children's playgrounds. Page 8 Area 6: The Seasonal Wetland Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the area Do Nothing in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . Complete restoration of the seasonal Habitat wetland. Restoration can be defined as Restoration removal of all non-native plants, reintroduction of native plants, and restoration of the severed connections and Improve wetland functions. Pathways along the upland edge will allow for public access. Area 7: The Northern Interior Option A: . This option recommends low-rise Low-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Option B: . This option recommends mid-rise Mid-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Option C: . This option recommends high-rise High-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Page 9 Area 8: The Southern Interior Option A: . This option recommends low-rise Low-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Option B: . This option recommends mid-rise Mid-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Option C: . This option recommends high-rise High-rise residential development with the tallest Residential structures placed away from the refuge. Development. For complete description see page 4. Area 9: The Gateway Option A: . This option provides for a mixed-use Low-rise Mixed- development that combines neighborhood use Residential & retail, restaurants, and residential. Complimentary . The buildings will cascade or terrace back Commercial toward Bay Boulevard and the City. Option B: . Same as Option A but this option Mid-rise Mixed- use Residential & recommends mid-rise residential development with the tallest structures Complimentary placed away from the utility wires. Commercial Option C: . Same as Option A but this option High-Rise Mixed- use Residential & recommends high-rise residential development with the tallest structures Complimentary placed away from the utility wires. Commercial Page 10 Area 10: Under the Wires Option A: . Do Nothing is defined as leaving the Do Nothing area in its current state. . For complete description see page 3. Option B: . Commonly referred to as a passive Passive Park Space neighborhood park. and Parking . This area will be designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized recreation activities such as picnicking, walking, jogging, and biking. . Provide parking for the Nature Center, guest parking, and for any parks or trails within the project area. . Connect parking by trails, sidewalks, and pathways. . Uses not allowed include soccer, baseball, tennis, basketball and other similar activities. Area 11: The Freeway Site Option A: . A visitor serving commercial hotel Visitor Serving can be defined as a 1 to 5-story Commercial Hotel structure from a nationally with Community recognized hospitality vendor and based on a standard design. Serving Retail and . Requiring upscale design features Commercial will take advantage of the freeway access and provide an appropriate "gateway" into Chula Vista. . Commercial uses such as restaurants and meeting space may also be included. . Retail and restaurants that are oriented towards visitors and the local community and take advantage of the freeway access and visibility. . Uses can include mid-priced sit down restaurants or retail establishments. . Design will be stand-alone buildings surrounded by parking lots. Page l' Dear Mr. Hunter I am strongly opposed to the Bay Front Project. These areas are home to endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances and predation. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence or the wild life refuge areas. I think that the development or this project will not only hurt plants and animals but also the residence in the City of Chula Vista. It will cause more pollution in our air and water. I think its wrong because your just going to make our City more crowed then what it is now. Now imagine if you built building there, there would be twenty four thousand more cars traveling through our city causing more pollution and a lot more traffic in the morning and evening. I am totally against the Bay Front Project, All my life I have lived here and not only would you be hurting everything that surrounds the area, but you would be taking away all my child-hood. All my memories with my family and going to the park, playing at the play ground and going fishing with my Dad, all that will be gone. I think you can built a better project, where it can help our community to continue to enjoy our Bay Front. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very important project for the South County and San Diego Bay. Sincerely, Jose Herrera Dear Mary Salas, My name is Elisa Ortega and I personally don't want the bayfront village project to be built. First of all its going to affect many endangered and sensitive plants and animals whose home is around those areas. Due to the size of this project ,it could threaten the existence of the wildlife refuge areas. Another thing that's really going to get affected by this project is that the schools are going to be more overcrowded. I don't want that to happen because our school is already way too overcrowded and I don't think it would be a good idea to put more people into this area. It can also cause the rates of asthma to go up due to more car traffic. There are many other alternatives for this site that will not cause the same impacts. A good alternative might be that instead of building such a big thing it can be smaller. Thank you for readjng my letter please write back. Sincerely, Elisa Ortega Cé.JUA 0 ~ Oct. 3, 2002 Dear. Mr. Hunter The city of Chula Uista has requsted the uiews of the public on the proposed Bayfront uillage project for the Chula Uista bayfront by Pacifica Deuelopment. It is directly adjacent to sensitiue wetland habitats in the Bay and the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitiue plants and animals that are sensitiue to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the uery eHistence of the wildlife refuge areas. I am strongly opposed to this deuelopment because it is too dense and intense for this area, it will haue deuastating impacts on the sensitiue natural resources in the region, pollute our air and water, and will clog our already crowded streets with ouer 24,000 additional car trips a day, and will contribute to ouercrowding in our schools, and will destroy open space for people liuing in western Chula Uista and National City. There are many eHcellent alternatiues for deuelopment at this site that will not cause the same deuastating impacts as this project will cause. Three alternatiues haue been proposed by labor, enuironment, and community groups and should be fully analyzed as part of the enuironmental process. Each community alternatiue will prouide significant benefits to the economy and local residents uersus the uery negatiue impacts of the proposed project. Please, send the deuelopment back to the drawing board to propose a more sensible project that will accessible and use able by the local residents, will protect the enuironment, and will enhance, not degrade, our quality of life. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this uery important project for South County and San Diego Bay. Sincerely, Marco Garcia Dear Mary Salas: I will ask you to take some of your time to read this letter. I am a high school student at Chula Vista high school, I have been living in Chula Vista for three years and I like that it is a peaceful place .I have two months hearing about that the city planning to build a bunch of houses in Bay front I live close to the Bay front trolley station and something that I like from here is that is that I can see the beach from my house .Now the city wants to build a bunch of houses, if they build all those houses in front of the beach there's going to be more trash. Imagine 24000 additional car trips a day that means more trash, more contamination, more people with asthma and more pollution. Our schools are going to be overcrowded, imagine if Chula Vista High School has a lot of students before all those6000 people came with their families, that means 6000 more problems to our community. There are alternatives, other projects could be pursued, projects that maximize park and open space, cultural activities and greatly reduce the negative impacts and increase the quality of life for residents. P.S. Thank's for your time and that you read my letter write me back, I will be very thankful if you answer my letter. Sincerely, !]'.eatnz '1<ffnáon. ------ --- Dear Mr" Hunter, These areas are home to many endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. Because this project is big, it could threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. I am opposed to this project because it will have devastating impacts on the sensitive and natural resources in the region, pollute our air and water, and will clog our already crowded streets with over 24,000 additional car trips a day, will contribute to overcrowding in our schools, and will destroy the space for people living in Chula Vista and National City. There are many other alternatives that won't cause the same impacts just like this project will cause" I know people have better ideas that will not lead to the dramatic impact the project would make. Thank you for taking your time to read this letter on the importance of this project for South County and San Diego Bay" Sincerely, Denise Gasca 'D ~,~ Cp QvO C CÄ.. CJ)ear?!lr. J{unter, The City of Cliu{a 'Vista lias requested tlie views of tlie pu6úc on tlie project Œaypront 'Vi[{age project proposed: for tlie cliuCa 'Vista 6ayfront 6y Pacifica CJ)eveCopment. It is directfy adjacent to sensitive wetCand: lia6itats in tlie 6ay and at tlie Sweetwater :Nationa[ Wiúflife refuge. These areas are liome to many end:angered and sensitive pCants and: animaCs tliat are sensitive to noise, figlit, po[[ution, distur6ances, and: predation. CJ)ue to tlie size of tliis project, it couu tlireaten tlie very e:x;.istence of tlie wiU[ife refuge areas. ?!lay6e if you couUjust 6ui[d Cess structures. CJ)on't ruin too mucli of tlie open space out tliere. Thanftyou for taÆjng tlie time to read tliis fetter. )'l6raliam 1(u6i Dear Mary Salas; Just recently, the issue of the new Bayfront Village has come to my attention. There are severe consequences to be dealt with if the new Bayfront Village is built. The habitat of many wetland plants and animals will diminish, due to this construction. The Sweet Water Wildlife Refuge is home to many beautiful plants and animals. Some of these plants and animals are sensitive to noise, light, disturbances, pollution, and predatation. Some of which are endangered or on the verge of extinction. Consequently, by building this new village, these plants and animals won't be around much longer" Our future children and grandchildren won't have the beauty and serenity that we enjoy now. Instead, they will live in a world full of pollution and concrete" Is this what you want for their future? Another of the many issues is pollution. The toxins in the air that we all breathe are deadly and cancerous and will eventually kill us all. Carcinogens in the smog can cause cancer and severe asthma" The asthma rate in the South Bay alone has gone up 23%. All of the traffic that will be caused by the 24,000 more car trips daily, will inevitably cause that rate to increase. There will be 6,000 more people living in Chula Vista alOlle if the Sweet Water Wildlife Refuge is to be replaced with hollow concrete blocks and pollution causing vehicles. The smoking rate will inevitably go up along with the death rate by second hand smoke. The already overcrowded schools will become even more crowded. To even everything out new schools will be built, causing mass destruction of our wildlife habitat. There are many positive alternatives to building the Bay Front Village" One alternative would be to make the village smaller. Maybe a children's recreation center could be built overlooking the Sweet Water Wildlife Refuge. Other alternatives have been proposed by labor, environmental, and community groups. These alternatives can offer a positive path for the residents to go through. Please analyze these alternatives to try and improve the future for our children. Please respond to give me your insights on the subject. Sincerely, 72v9 t£I ~~ Rachel Hirst Dear Mr. Hunter, I am opposed to Ihe Bayfront Village Proposal. This project will overcrowd your already overcrowded streets and schools. The negatives hugely outwejgh the positives in this proposal. You are proposing that we are to endanger plants and animals. I cannot believe that an idea like this would actually be consjdered. I am not completely against this project, but I am against the high-rise buildings and the amount of housing units you are proposing. Why do you want to make to make Chula Vista resemble downtown San Diego, we are already have a downtown. Not only will this project bring people but it will bring people with cars causing there to be hundreds of more cars on the already crowded streets. These cars will likely be taking children to schools. If you already djdn't know many schools are too overcrowded. Why would we want more students in, the children can't be taught right if there are 45 students in a class! The good thing about thjs idea js that it wjll house many people. Most likely though it will not be possible for many people to move in because the price of housing in San Diego is ridiculous, and that is how we have gotten to be. Thank you for taking the time to read my point of view. I am not asking you to estimate this project, but maybe you can reduce it. Sjncerely, Benjamin Torres Dear Mr. Hunter I am strongly opposed to the development of the Bay Front Village because due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence of the wild life refuge areas. It wi!] contribute to overcrowding in our schools and it will destroy open space for people living in Western Chula Vista and National City. There are many excellent alternatives for the development at this site that will not cause the same devastating impact that this project will cause. So please don't build Bayfront Village. Please write back. Thank You. Sincerely, Angel Galindo 'j)eP\( ~'f \\~" The city vista has a different view of the project and it's my belief that we should create something more useful for kids and teenagers" Today youth has nothing to do and they something to do today youth will have a great future tomorrow. A place that could be next the sweet water national wild life refuses. I oppose this project because what we need is not to move people what that will get into trouble use need places to get people out of trouble. Why create more houses that will over crowd our bay, it will have devastating affects on the sensitive natural resources in the region, devastatingly pollute our air and water. We would be happier if we got a more useful place like a theme park. I don't want pollution to affect our world in the future. Sincerely ;~ Fabian Yorba Dear Mr. Hunter: Hello my name is Fabian Fiscal. I am 17 years old. I felt very bad about the project Bay front because this areas are the only wetland habitats in the bay and at the sweetwater National wildlife refuge. This areas are home of many endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances and predation. I think of the future and I ask my self where my children going to play? Where are they going to see the nature? And also I see another big problem. If today there are over 24,000 additional car trips a day, will contribute to overcrowding in our schools. What will happened if this project came true. They will destroy open space for people living in western Chula Vista and National City. I just whant to protect our quality of life. If more people come here we will live like ants we will not be able to breath so that's why I propose a more sensible project that will accessible and usable by the local residents. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important issue for South Country and San Diego bay. Please read my leters and give me your opinion about this project. Dear Mr" Hunter: I am opposed to the Bay Front Village project proposed for the Chula Vista Bay front by Pacific Development. I am opposed to the Bay front Village because I think you can make a park or other frailties that do not hurt animals or the environment as much as this project will. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence of the wild life refuge areas. This project will have devastating impacts on the sensitive natural recourses in the region, pollute our air and water, and will crowd our already crowded streets with over 24,000 additional car trips a day. There are many excellent alternatives for development at this site that will not cause the same devastating impacts as the project will cause. Each community alternative will provide significant benefits to the economy and local residents versus the very negative impacts of the proposed project. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to make a comment in the Bay front Village project. PLEASE WRITE ME BACK. Sincerely, Mr. Edgar Barraza. t .... Ðear :Mary SaCas, Tfie city of cfiuCa 'Vista fiave 6een fiow as dean city and it fiave to stay tfiat way! <You guys putting 3,400 residentia{ units are not going to fiefp at aŒ Tfie streets are going to 6e pac/¿ and tfiere's not going to 6e any space for nature to grow. (You guys a{ready 6uiU fiomes on top of tfie fii{{ and now you guys want to 6uiU fiomes in tfie 6ay front. Went I fiave efiiUren's tfiey are not going to now wfiat a 6ayside is. fl{{ tfie animaCs tfiat five 6y tfie 6ay are going to rose tfiere fiome. We tfie CfiuCa 'Visitant need and want open areas. Tfian!¿you for taking your time and reading my fetter. Sincerefy, Ivy CR9driguez (CfiuCa 'Vista Jfigfi SefiooQ P.S pfease write 6aef¿ Dear Mary Salas, I am writing you this letter concerning the Bay Front Village project. I'm opposed to this project because this project will endanger a lot of endangered animals. It will endanger the animals by pollution. Our air will become polluted. Chula Vista is already crowded. I'm also opposing to this project because our high schools are so crowded that you can't even walk through the hallways. So if we were to add more people 'would our students education change? A teacher can only focus on a certain amount of students. You have to consider the other people who live in Chula Vista. Especially the children of our community and the people who drive. There are other ideas that you can do that will prosper and be excellent for the community of Chula Vista Like a new Recreation Center or another Mall. Even if you build a new library that would be nice to. Anything that can help our community instead of destroying it will be prosperous. Thank you for reading my letter. Please write me back Sincerely, Tashera Watson " /r 1 , - ./(/ fl'/ (: ;~, j J t-; I ~. /. ( / October 3,2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, The Bayfront Village development that you are planning to building may sound good to you but what about the people who live over by that area. Did you think of all the consequences that would come out of the new development? Well, I'm someone who live over by that area and personally I don't want to have to deal with the traffic or the pollution that will come out of this project. We all ready have a lot of traffic and pollution from the interstate 5 freeway. I know that there is some good reason to this project but I believe that there are more bad ones. I'm just guessing but you probably don't live by where you're going to be building, but I do so it affects me more than you. Someone who it will really affect is the Nature Center that is right by the project. I have been going there since I was a little girl and there are so many precious animals in there that you will be hurting if you go through with this project. If your going to build something why not something the community would use and that wouldn't hurt the animals in the Nature Center. A good development would be a park with a recreational center in it. That way we wouldn't have to travel to far to get to Balboa Park. All the skate parks that we have in San Diego are up north and some of us don't have transportation to get there. You could also build a paintball center. In the recreational center there could be an arcade with video games and pool tables. AlIl'rn asking is for the City Of Chula Vista not to build anything so huge. If you do, please take my ideas into consideration. If you can, please write me back. Sincerely, Liana Corona Oct. 3, 2002 Dear. Mr. Hunter The city of [hula Uista has requsted the uiews of the public on the proposed Bayfront uillage project for the [hula Uista bay front by Pacifica Deuelopment. It is directly adjacent to sensitiue wetland habitats in the Bay and the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitiue plants and animals that are sensitiue to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the uery eHistence of the wildlife refuge areas. I am strongly opposed to this deuelopment because it is too dense and intense for this area, it will haue deuastating impacts on the sensitiue natural resources in the region, pollute our air and water, and will clog our already crowded streets with ouer 24,000 additional car trips a day, and will contribute to ouercrowding in our schools, and will destroy open space for people liuing in western [hula Uista and National City. There are many eHcellent alternatiues for deuelopment at this site that will not cause the same deuastating impacts as this project will cause. Three alternatiues haue been proposed by labor, enuironment, and community groups and should be fully analyzed as part of the enuironmental process. Each community alternatiue will prouide significant benefits to the economy and local residents uersus the uery negatiue impacts of the proposed project. Please, send the deuelopment back to the drawing board to propose a more sensible project that will accessible and useable by the local residents, will protect the enuironment, and will enhance, not degrade, our quality of life. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this uery important project for South County and San Diego Bay. Sincerely, Marco Romero j{~~ t eeeeee..eeeee.eeee....~ t Dear Ms. Mary Salas, 1 totally disagree with this Bayfront Village Project. You are destroying precious nature that some people adore. The land that you want to build on may be memories for many people that live in the city of Chula Vista. In the city of Chula Vista we have very few parks and playgrounds for the children that live here in Chula Vista, because of all the construction that people have done to the city. Back in the olden days there used to be big patches of free space and green grass for families to have picnics and to bond. Now it is hard for people to find places to have picnics or to just sit on nice grass because we have all these big buildings, hotels, and other things. Where you want to build this village there are many animals there. Most of the animals are endangered and they may be sensitive to the noise, light pollution, disturbances, and predation that you want to bring. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. Your project may pollute our water and air of Chula Vista. It will clog our already crowded streets with over 2'1ßOO additional car trips a day. There are many other things you can build there that will not destroy beautiful Chula Vista. Please consider another project, you can even make it smaller, or not do a project at all. Our schools are already over crowded and it's already hard for students to learn with so many students in the class. It is also hard on the teachers because they have so many students to teach and sometimes they can't help each and every student. Please don't over crowd our schools more than what they are already are by building your project. PLEASE WRITE BACK!!! Thank you Sincerely, Valalita F. Tutogi I I orober 04, 2002 Dear Mary Salas, I I I am opposed to the Bayfront Village Project because of the problems that I believe it will cause. Several people in my family have asthma, and I think the extra cars, trucks, and construction traffic will greatly aff~ct their affect their health. I have seen my mother have an asthma attack a~d go to the emergency room. It was very scary for me and probablýiriôreför he~. I think the added 24,000 carswillcr~ ilte 1110re proþlems for people getting to school and work on time. I am a transfer student at C~ula Vista High School and my attendance is closely monitored. I feel that it wo~ld be harder for me to " I get to school on time because you can't predict when tMre will be traffic. I feel a lot of students have that problem and I don't wan* to get worse. also concerned åbOtifwildlife, in thE¡ Bayfrontj",rea and as an a~ernative I think the wi~life-r~f~gecöuld'be'èxp~nd~.1 I feel that this project iSbå( .fot.~,:,eryone-in()hu~,Vista þecauseofjilll the negative affects. I think Chula Vista is a d~~¡~abl~plac~ 1oIÎ'Je',.bY~~~\tVþÚfc take away everything desirable about it. The parks and ~pen space ortîhe Bayfront are that this city has to go away from "city-life" ~nd just relax and be outside. I think the benefits of this project are hi9hlyouwteighed by the negative impact that it would have on ourcommunity. I hope that you will c:onsider the - threatthatthisp~~!e~t þOS'*' to .òurcity- Thank you for Y9ur t_ime and please write back. ' , , I '-'" ";v,,~,/::,,,,:~"j~.,t(~:_';-';'c!'J"~i~"" , , ",", ":"",',':,.',".',",',",',','j,:".",:..""",."""""","il",','"".,',',':,,':"',',"",',',',.,'"",'",,",,:',',',:',"'"""',','".,,,:.:,',j~',',,""""""""'":""""",'""'"",,, ,""."';""" ".".: ,c"'i~>:~,..' , , Antonia Rom' ro ,¡I 1087f:!ax, Ct. ' San Diego. Ca I 92154" I I i I i ¡ i Dear Mr. Hunter~ I strongly disagree with the idea that Pacifica Development wants to construct the Bayfront Village. By doing this you will be ruining the home of many endangered and sensitive plants and animals. They are very sensitive and may be harmed by light predation~ pollution~ and noise. Building this development would be like throwing gasoline over an open flame. We are already worried about crowded streets~ polluted air~ water~ and not to mention what affects us the most over crowded schools You complain of students not learning~ but how are we supposed to do it when development like this keep pushing more and more students into our schools. Why not create something that will help the community and preselVe the natural beauty instead of developing something that will contaminate our society. Please take into consideration the points 1 have made towards the Bayfront Village. 1 hope to hear from you soon. SincerelY~ ¿Jkor/ø-/uM' ¿jJ!zd"etå Dear Mary Salas: I am writing to you to let you know that I am really opposed to the Bayfront village project. One of the reasons why I am opposed to it is because these are~s are home to many endangered plants and animals that are sensitive to light, pollution, noise, disturbances and predation. The size of this project could threaten the existence of wild llife that lives in this area. This project will overcrowd us more in our already over crowded streets, it will also overcrowd our schools and our students are going to learn less. ' There are other alternatives for the development of this that won't cause all these problems" Therefore I recommend that you build a park where kids could play instead of getting in trouble" Thank you for reading my letter~ I would appreciate if you write back. Sincerely, ~~ama nte Oct. 3, 2002 Dear. Mr. Hunter I am strongly opposed to this deuelop~ent because it is too dense and intense for this area, it will h~ue deuastating impacts on the sensitiue natural resources i/J the region, pollute our air and water, and will clog our already rowded streets with ouer 24,000 additional car trips a day, nd will contribute to ouercrowding in our schools, and will des1roy open space for people liuing in western Chula Uista and Natilonal City. There are many eHcellent alternatiues for deuelopment at this site that will not cause the same deuas~ating impacts as this project will cause. Three alternatiues haue been proposed by labor, enuironment, and community grouqs and should be fully analyzed as part of the enuironmental þrocess. Each community alternatiue will prouide significa~t benefits to the economy and local residents uersus the uer~ negatiue impacts of the proposed project. ' Please, send the deuelopment back to 'he drawing board to propose a more sensible project that will actessible and useable by the local residents, will protect the enuirlmment, and will enhance, not degrade, our quality of life. I Thank you for the opportunity to commlent on this uery important project for South County and San piego Bay. Sincerely, Reno John Bernardini ~~~ i Dear ms. Selas ' ! I have recently heard about "Project Bay front Village", and t am opposed to it. I am a student here at Chula Vjsta High and here are some reasons thy I am opposed to this project. . First if this project is passed then it will add 6,00 mor¡' Chula Vista residents, not to mention it will include more children to our already over ~pulated schools. It will also add up to 25,000 more car trips a daily, which mean more tra fic amongst our streets. I would also like to add that "Project Bay front ViliagF' would also affect the animals, especially the Sweetwater Wildlife refuge. I I personally have an alternate idea, whether you cho04e to acknowledge it js entirely up to you, but I believe that a recreation center woul be very appropriate. I would keep kids out of trouble and away from kidnappers. ; Thank you for your time and I hope you acknowledg9 my letter and write back. S,ncerely, Demetrio Brown Dear Mr.Hunter, I am strongly opposed to the 'Bayfront illage project. If you build this project it could endanger sensiti e plants and animals that wont have a place to be. This will really hurt their environment. I think since they are endangere we should take better care of them. Also the development of t is project will not only hurt the plants and animals but us the resi ence in the city of Chula Vista. It will cause more pollution in out air and water and it will clog our already crowded streets with oveJ 24,000 additional car trips a day. There are many excellent alternatives for developing at this site that will not cause that same devastating i pact as this project will cause. I think all residence in the city of C ula Vista should have a chance to choose what they want. Each ommunity alternative will provide significant benefits to t e economy and local residence versus the very negative impac s of the proposed project. . Please send the development back to the drawing board to propose a more sensible project. That will be u sealed by local residence. Will protect the environment that wi I enhance not degrade our quality of life. Thank you for the opportunity to comment 0 this very important project. For south county and San Diego Bay. Sinqerely, S~ry Altamirano § Dear: Steve Padilla Please don't build buildings cause yo will ruin the wild life refuge. And will over crowed the cit and the schools and if you build any more big buildings We might be threatened by terriost the b y is the only space we have and we don't want it taken fro us and the wild life cause we have a lot of endangered s ices. Most people don't want you to build any thing cause people need space if you do build somet ing at least make a park make that the bay front village pr . ect and just put some basket ball courts, base ball fields foot ball fields. Thank you for your time please writ me back Sincerely Anthony Gullekson Dear Mr. Hunter The city of Chula Vista has requested the views of the public on the project Bay Front. I understand tha you have good plans with this project and I also understand you want t build good things, but lets see what it would take away and what it c old cause for Chula Vista and other places. It would cause overcrowd d schools, and over crowded streets, and also cause pollution to the w lands, wildlife, animals and plants" I like your plan but it is goin to cause a lot of damage to Chula Vista. Thank you for your time Thank You Ms. Garcia l ({, I, ' Mr. Hunter I'm strongly opposed to the Bayfront Village roject. I believe that the project will do more hanD then good to the city. he reason I think this is because our schools are already over populated and very year the populations grow. Just imagine what this project can do to the people who are in the area. Another reason I think its bad is whenever I g to J street park it's a sense of getting away. Another place is Imperial Be h I've walk up and down that beach and when I see the land as it once as thousands of years ago I just for some reason feel good. Think about ho this project will endanger some of the animals in the area. We will s ffer from air pollution, and water pollution. The traffic will also increase w ich it is already very bad since we are some close to the border. If you still decide to build there, consider leav ng some of the ]and intact. Another good idea would be if you built some entertainment and a couple of schools so that our schools won't be so po ulated. I'd really appreciate if you would write me back Thank You. Sincere y, Michael May 'd~ Dear Mr. Hunter: I am strongly opposed to the Bayfront Village project for a couple of reasons. First of all I oppose the project because our schools are alrea y over populated and by completing this project our city will be crowded and our stre ts will also be crowded, our air and water will be more polluted than they already are. I th nk you should leave it just the way it is, or you should consider building something sma er. Because we are not the only ones living here there are endangered and sensitive plan~s and animals. There are many other things you can build that won't threaten any ani .Is or plants around that area. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very mportant project. Please write back. ~ Dear Mr. Hunter: I am strongly opposed to the Bayfront Village project for a couple of reasons. First of aliI oppose the project because our schools are alrea4y over populated and by completing this project our city will be crowded and our stre+s will also be crowded, our air and water will be more polluted than they already are. I thInk you should leave it just the way it is, or you should consider building something smalrer. Because we are not the I only ones living here there are endangered and sensitive plan~s and animals. There are many other things you can build that won't threaten any anin$ls or plants around that area. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very 'mportant project. Please write back. Sincerel ,Mr. Camacho 7fl(ãú5~ :bea4 M 16. M CVUf $aI.M, J ~ ~ wdh Ik ~ Ik ß~ Vd&¡ø (YWfed. J ~ wdh Ik ~ air Ik ß Vd&¡ø ~ d u ~ ~ h Ik $ ~ IV ai«maJ l1J.. f<eIu¥ WÍte1ø I11mUf ~ and ~ pianú and ~ . . J ~ thai 'fO# Íw ~ ()4 ~ wdL wk ~ ~. f«<¡ht. Wi ikM.e ~ aJze ~ h fWidø, 1k¡Jd, pJki«m and . . J1J Iudt ~ thai Ik ß~Vd&¡øwÆ~haillk. . . IWid&I and ;¡ 'fO# ~ t/wJ¿akuidwku~~b~ thaik¡~ HM:i h a J1JJd4ø f<eIu¥l {)!k4 ihøt 'fO# pæpk. 1/w ß~ Vd&¡ø (YWfed wÆ aIM ~ Ik ah and ~ thai tUe. Jt wÆ ~ (M.{4 ~ CJW-uJ.d dzœú wdh ~ 24, 000 c:aJt . . Jt wÆ OOM ~ (M.{4 ~ and ail thøw pbøf wÆ r¡d CJW-uJ.d wdh 6,000 pæpk thai {{jß 'I.L end up ~ Iu¡ ~ Ik ß~ Vd&¡ø, wizat akui Ik ~ df1aœ thai {{jß kw.ø IWUL? J1J Iut ~ a piaœ wÆ~bail thu ch.aMl ßudd a JteC.Iæa.Úrm ~ ~, . ~ CO-Wl.Ú and Ik ~ df1aœ c= k u1ed h M ~ ,Wœe4 ()4 Ifmu4 ~. J1J ell tkm/z 'fO# þt ~ tpM Úmø ~ thu . (J &.uø fAJ/Uie ~ wdh tpM ~ em Ik ß~ Vd&¡ø (YWfed. $~, Md,..f!~ ~~) 10/3/02 Dear Mary Salas, I strongly oppose the Bayfront Vi~lage project. It is going to endanger the wetland habitats in th bay and at the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. This lace is home to many animals and plants. It could threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. This development will pollute our air and water. It will clog our already crowed streets and hig ways with over 24,000 cars trips a day. It will overcrowd 0 r schools and will get rid of open space for people living in w stern Chula Vista and National City. How about building a park there ith playgrounds and bathrooms. Please write me back. Thank y u for your time. Sincerely, Daniel Cabeza de Baca October 8, 2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, There have been many discussions that you are planning to build new houses on the northern Chula Vista bay front. Buildin.g these houses will cause the ocean to be covered by those buildings and We won't be able to use the ocean for things such as swimming, fishing, enjoying the sun. When the sun sets and rises we will not be able to see its beauty. I think instead of building houses, why don't you try to build,things tlw,J¡ we really need. Build it in a different place. For example, why don't you try to an!build a new school in Chula Vista or another place. My school has almost 2,"800 stu<J.etits in it and is too many, Build a new school and divide the students among the schools. Another idea is to use that money that you are going to spend on those buildings, instead give that money to another country, they might need it more then we do. In some countries people don't have houses to live in or food to eat. They have children that want to learn but they don't have schools or books. Sometimes they sleep without eating and in the winter they sit under a tree to protect their selves from the rain or snow. They don't have any warm cloths wear when it's cold. I hope that this letter will make sense to you. Think about what I have written before you start building those houses. Thanks for giving me a chance to express my opinion and I hope it will help you decide what to do. Please write back as soon as you have the chance. From, Suzan Almasti A student from Chula Vista High School Dear Mr. Steve Padilla, This letter is regarding project Bay Front viJJage. I, along with many other individuals have very strong concerns about this project. I don't believe that this change in our city should be made. If it is just too important to blow off for a group of people who are looking ou~ for our city then please take into consideration building a smaller, mote conservative structure. You may think that you are making great changes for Chula Vista but there are defiantly many more bad points about it thrun great. Did you know that there are numerous sensiti\ e and endangered animals and plants you will destroy during this process you seem to think of as some kind of extraordinary transformation. Please at the least think about these feeble, p°'jVerless, and unaided creatures. And please value those beautiful plantstPa, are helping us with the oxygen we need to live. As if Chula Vista isn't already crowded enougjh, by bui]ding this project, 25,000 additional car trips will be made daily. There will also be approx. 6 more sky scrapers standing up to 24 storie& high. Now that you have heard a piece of my opinion, I hope you wilJ take it into consideration. I hope to hear back from you soon. Thank you very much, Amanda Enriq¡uez Dear Mr. Hunter, I think the Bay Front Village Project that you are planning is very wrong. If you de) this, then the animals and wildlife won't really have any place to go. Also it will mess up the beauty of plants and the environment around it. It shows the beauty of Chula Vista. It's a very nice area to look at. The area brings back a lot of memories for me and other people too. It really hurts Jine and other people to see it gone. It's the area we all grew up in. Also it's going to pollute the area. It will increase traffic as well. The area will give us diseases, such as asthma. You can kill and/or hurt the animal life. I hope you make the right decision. Please write back so I can understand a little more. Thank you for taking your time to read this letter. Sincerr ¿ ~~ Brian Egipto t "" Dear Mary Salas I opposed to the Bayfront Village because it is next to the Sweetwater Wildlife refuge. In these areas, there are home to many endangered plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollutic)fi, disturbances, and predation. The project for building the Bayfront Village is big and can destroy many of the endanger plants and lives, and even its very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. I ask you to please not to make the project successful. Instead, you could build something small there and reduce the risk of destroying the wildlife refuge. If the project does pass, you will be brining more people in Chula Vista, and many of our schools are already overcrowd. Going to classes is already hard for me because the hallways are crowed, and the more students, the harder for it for the students to go to their classes. Another thing is that there will be 25,000 car trips a day and I have asthma. Those 25,000car trip a day will be filling the air with pollution and makiI1ß it harder for the people and I who have asthma to breathe. There is a recent study found that hospitalization rates for asthma are 23% higher in Sòuthbay than the rest of the County. More cars, trucks, and construction tratlfic will only make the problem worse for me the people who have asthma problems. I believe that the Chula Vistans need and want more open space, and the only large open space available for western Chula Vista is the Bayfront. The loss of this area will create a bad problem worse. The Bayfront is a nice area for people to go and relax and get away for their problems and even see the ocean. Therefore, I ask you to not pass this project and thank for reading my letter. I hope I have changed your mind about building the Bayfront Village. Please write back. Sincerely, Alexandro Estolano "Dear Mr. Hunter, It has been brought to my attention that the city of Chula Vista is going to build the Bay front Village project. Imagine all the animals' homes ruined" All our plants would be killed. All of our schools would be over crowded with to many kids. For example, our neighborhoods would be full of pollution. There would be nowhere to go. Haven't the government built enough cities and houses. Is the government that eager to make more money? To ruin peoples child hood life just because the government wants to make more money. That's not right" Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. 5 ÍÆ'tCØV eÆy) T yveÀ.; G VeeY\l ~~ Dear Mr. Hunter, ~ næœ is Sam1el Marchan I am 15 years old ani attending Chu1.a Vista High School. While at school I was readn1g about that proj ect called Bayfrant Village. I personally dem't live there rot I did live there far 8 years before I IO:)Ve(i to San Ysidro. This is wh;y I an writU1g' this letter to say that I am against this project and hopefully you will stop. There are plenty of reasons wh;y I am against it. For exarrple; crowèed schools. The school Ian attending (Chula Vista High School) was only IœaIlt far 1500 students, at this point ~ are at 2600 + students. with you're project, you wi 11 aðd 6000 additionaJ. residents witch means at least 2 kids per family ani that could be IœSsy . Another problem is crowded schools and freeways with over 25000 additionaJ. car trips per day. ~ father and brother have enough trouble gettU1g' to work already and I don' t want it to get an;y worse . So what I am trying to say is think it through a little IrDre and take tl1ese facts into consideration. Thank you and please write Iœ back. Sincerely, Sam1el ~ ~ t. ~ I,. Dear Mary Salas, I heard from my English teacher that the city council is going to build houses in Chula Vista. He gave me a flyer saying why this project is bad. I read the flyer and I agreed with it. These extra houses mean extra people. There will be six thousand extra people. That can possibly mean six thousand more people driving. That can cause a lot of traffic and probably some car accidents. More people can also mean crowding our schools. If you guys are going to build anything, it should be park, baseball field, football field, basketball courts, or anything that can keep kids out of trouble. I appreciate you for reading this letter and listening to my opinion, and if you have time I would appreciate if you can write me a response, thanks. Sincerely, Eddie palmerin Dear Mayor Horton; I am opposed to the Bay Front Village Project. I believe by physically constructing these buildings, you will be harming animals and plants; you will be causing more pollution by having 24,000 more daily car trips crowding up the road. By having more cars on the road you will be causing people to be sick, and more people will have asthma. I do not see the point to build 3,400 more house and six new skyscrapers that will be just block the sun from shining. Where will the kids fly their kites with a lot of telephone wires everywhere? This is coming from a teen's perspective and I think it is wrong. I do not know ~f it will change your mind but I tried. I hope you really think about it and put what I said in to some consideration. I thank you for giving me your time and if you have any real good reason as to why you are doing this than please write back. Thank you, Sincerely, Daniel Dear, Mr. Hunter Hi my name is Michelle, I have lived in Ohula Vista for almost 15 years. I heard about this project called the Bayfront Village¡ and I'm opposed to it. One of the reasons is because it is going to destroy the Sweetwater-National Wildlife Refuge. And I really like that place. I remeJnber when my parents use to take me there to see the endangered species. I really don't want you to take that place away from us. Do to this project ~our going to endanger the life of small creatures that are sensitive to nois& or pollution. Due to the size of this project, It could threaten the very e~dstence of the wildlife refuge areas. I am opposed to the Bayfront village because it's go~ng to cause over population. Streets are going to be more crawded pollution in the air. More diseases are going to appear because other people wiant to move over from other places. I would really like you to think about what your going to do to our community. I really don't want you to take away the things that are away from that beautiful place. Just to make sometihing that is going to hurt other animals. Please think about it some more, I would appreciat~ if you could write back. S\(ìcer\1 1Jn.\\e Dear Mary Salas, Birds are one of the most precious things in the world. A lot of them will be killed. Some will be on the board of extinction. A lot of plant life will also be put at risk. This project will threaten the existence of the wildlife refuge areas. It will affect the habitats in the Bay and the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. I am opposed to this project. There will be no more oPEln space. Where will all my children and grandchildren play and see the beauty that is the Bay? Will they have a chance to see any natural beauty, or will you take away that opportunity away from them? What about your children and grandchildren? Where will they play? It is essential that all of the children of San Diego have a place to play, a place where they can spend time with their loved ones, a place where they can feel free. Please, think about sending this development back to the drawing board to propose a more sensible project so it will protect the enVironment and our quality of life. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very important project. Please write back. Sincerely, Sandra Gutierrez 10/2/02 Dear Mr" Hunter, I am writing to let you know that I am not in favor of the Bay ITont Village project. I think that you are going to destroy many wildlife homes. I don't even want to think about how much more crowded the schools are going to be" For me as a student it is very frustrating to be walking through a hall and be bumping into somebody every five steps. I can live with this, but what I can't live with is knowing that the city of Chula Vista plans to destroy wildlife homes and endanger all ready endangered species and me not doing anything about it. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to comment on this project. I would appreciate it if you wrote me back when you have come to a final decision. Sincerely, Miguel Rodriguez. 1105 Cloqdwalk Canyon Dr" Chula Vista, CA 91911. ~_. 4 ~~.- ~~.u.~ "H~L~'" "...... ,..n.... ...., ""v "..~." Dear Mary Salas: I would like to start off by saying thank you for this opportunity you have given me to give my opinion on this very important proj ect for South County and San Diego Bay. I want to say that I strongly oppose this development because it is too difficult and stressful for this area" It will have an emotional and physical impact on a lot of people. Just imagine how crowded were all going to be, I think our schools are crowded enough. I have a very hard time walking through school, therefore we can't be more populated here in Chula Vista. I'm sure that there are other alternatives that will not cause this impact. Thank you. j Write Back.J- ~<Q Ò 1f1!UX Yvonne Figueroa 9/29/02 Dear Mary Salas, I am strongly opposed to the Bay front Village project. I do not think that it is a good idea to destroy something there for us to enjoy. Why take something so precious and turn it to just another crowded block? Think about it. Where will the Sweetwater Wildlife Refuge be, will there be another place for the animals to live? For example, the light-footed Clapper Rail is almost extinct. By taking your action with this project, you will destroy one hundred and twenty five acres of land. As a result the city will get crowded. Also the schools that our children attend to will get overcrowded. Our roads will get clogged and there will be an additional 25,000 car trips daily. Maybe the solution is not to destroy it and renovate it, but maybe make the project smaller. That is why you should send this development back to the drawing board and keep the park as it is. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Chura Vista Bay front Village Project. I will greatly appreciate it if you wrote back to me. Sincerely, Jorge Luis Terrones 891 Woodlawn Ave apt B Chula Vista, CA 91911 Dear Mr. Hunter, I am strongly opposed to the Bayfront Village Project. Here are some reason why you shouldn't build the Bayfront Village Project. It will cause more traffic then the traffic today. It will over populate our schools. They are over populated now. Also you'l1 destroy animal homes and rare plants if there is any more. More people in the city will cause more pollution in the air and in the water. I think you should use the landscape for a park or a paintball shooting range. You could make Bayfront small or just leave it the way it is now. Sincerely, Mr. Richard Armijo P.S. Thank you for reading my letter and please write back 6:!6¿g@a33:JHH~O]Z~T~ ~~- Dear Mr, Hunter, I am opposed to the Bayfront Village Project construction because it will destroy all the wildlife around there. There will be about 6,000 more residents, so that will overcrowd our already crowded schools. That means there will be around 25,000 car trips from all the new residents. All those cars and all those trips will cause more pollution. Meaning more asthma for kids in Chula Vista. Why over crowd, why do you want to put so much in such little room? There is no need for it Not only that, but taxes are going to go up so we can accomidate people we don't want It's not that we don't like other people, but we have so many already. Thank you for reading my letter commenting about the construction. I would like for you to write back. Thank you. Sincerely, Pedro Garcia Dear Mr. Hunter, I am strongly opposed to the building of the Bayfront Village Project, for the following reasons. First of all, It is directly adjacent to the wetland habitats in the Bayfront area and also it is located to the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. These are delicate ecosystems that are sensitive to noise, pollution, and any kind of disturbances brought to this bay. Furthermore, it would have a devastating impact on our air quality and our resources; also it would crowd our already crowded streets with over 24,000 additiona.l car trips a day. Our city's schools would also be affected by the overcrowding of students in the schools and will further harm our children's education. I realize the City of Chura Vista needs developments in certain parts of the city. But, the Bayfront Village Project doe-s not seem to be to benefit the residents of the Chula Vista Community. There are many other developments could be done for that speciffc site that would not cause such a devastating impact on the environment and the community. Sincerely, A. Tovar December 7, 2002 To: the Developers of the Chula Vista Bay area, and Chula Vista City Council: I do not want the areas west of the Interstate 5 Freeway to be heavily developed. We have seen so much development already in Chula Vista and the results have been unfortunate. Prime examples are the mess on H Street and other freeway access roads, and the excessive development in the Eastlake area. Schools are maxed out. This development will cause even worse commuter problems in the areas of Freeway 5, and more school and population overcrowding. Please consider an alternate to all this population increasing development. Make the shorelines and associated areas open space. Turn the area into a focal point for recreation, with parks, water sports, and wildlife issues considered. With the increasing interest in the arts, theatres, galleries, and so on would be attractions that could be marketed as recreational relief for the huge populations now in South Bay, San Diego and other communities, and Tijuana. I am sorry I am unable to attend the meeting scheduled today. I will be at the meeting scheduled next month. Thank you, ~ fJ. W~ Susan Walter 238 Second Avenue Chula Viata, CA 91910 (619) 426-5109 . , koo' co ,",. '.00"'°" 0' ". olU""" oOW"" ol ¡~~¡¡~i~~:: ~t!¡¡î~~i~::ii;~¡t~:¡~~~~~" ~::i' dm..Uoo. Tho".' """"00 ",t."b.. lB. "20 409 Palm Ave., Suite 100, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1121 Tel: 1619)429 7946 Hon. steve Padilla and City Council Members 276 4th Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor Padilla and City Council Members: During your December 7, 2002, public workshop at the Chula Vista High School on 4th Avenue, you will discuss yet another proposal to "develop" your bayfront. We will strongly recommend that you plan on an in-depth study of the likely effects of the impacts associated with global warming on any proposed development. It would be conscientious for your proposed developer to alert its investors to the hazards, both short term and long term, guaranteed to result from global warming. Please, for your information, refer to our May 29, 2001, MEMORANDUM to the California "Energy" Commission, SUBJECT: Testimony for SPECIAL MEETING DURING THE BUSINESS MEETING ON MAY 30, 2001, - - - - - with its attachment. Pay particular attention to our May 28, 2001, MEMORANDUM TO: Global Warming Files and more especially to Items 2. and 25., relating to sea level rise, and 22. relating to intense precipitation events. The intense precipitation events, made more damaging by accompanying wind and sometimes ice, are already happening. The sea level rise during the 20th century is a fact; that predicted for the year 2100, at the .88 meters (34.6 inches) would, when accompanied by a maj or hurricane coming in from the Pacific, would be a disaster for the Silver Strand and bayfront developments. Plan cautiously. Future events could be worse than predicted prior to the time when Bayfront investments would be amortized. SiJf4f/!:~A:ç (ØlðJu/J~ Attach; 5 pages ~~~~~l=Ià1è6fuDl~resfdent I- ,/ 11 "~;::0;:';"~::;':'~:~;ioo~":~:0;:::7.:~,oo.m 0< May 28, 2001 "'--"" '"'"' "0" 00' 0"""'0""' 0000'" . '-' "',.. '""', 0°",,"' "Uh 0 ¡. I 00"' d'moHo"- "0 ...ody " 1- "- "t,k, it '<0" thom bO~h:~O:"'~:~'::::: . d'moHo". Sopto.b.. 28, "" 409 Palm Ave., Suite 10°é::~;teUi\,~eM~:¡,f\¡¿:3~OM) ,el70 16191429 7946 0006 0597 2213 Return Receipt Requested MEMORANDUM TO: Global Warming Files FROM: William E. Claycomb,President SUBJECT: Summary for Policymakers, A Report of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Third Assessment The ¡pi rd AsseS~mf!IlL.Rs!'PQr:t_. was prepared by 122 coordinating Lead Authors, 515 Contributing Authors, 21 Review Editors and 337 Expert Reviewers. Delegations of 99 IPCC member countries participated ill the Eighth Session of Working Group I. They reported that: 1. there has been a widespread retreat of mountain glaciers in non-polar regions during the 20th century [page (p) 4] I Y 2. global average sea level rose between .1 AND .2 meters during the 20th century (p 4), 3" since 1950 there have been fewer extreme low temperatures and more extreme high temperatures (p 4) r 4" El Ninos have been more frequent, persistent and intense since the mid 1970's compared with the previous hundred years (p 5), 5" in parts of Asia and Africa the frequency and intensity of droughts have increased in recent decades (p 5), 6. emission of greenhouse gases and aerosols due to human activities continue to alter the atmosphere in ways that are expected to affect the climate (p 5), 7" concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases and their warming effect (watts per square meter) have continued to increase as a result of human activities (p 7), 8. the present co2 concentration has not heen exceeded page 1 of 3 Vision of Chura Vista bay front development I see the creation of a very special neighborhood with architecture that accentuates the natural beauty of our waterfront. The landscaping incorporates and preserves native plant and animal habitats. And, the development utilizes state of the art power and water conservation techniques that are the envy of other cities. Kartchner Caverns visitor center in Arizona is an example of the type of architecture and landscaping I am discussing-but Tucson would envy Chula Vista Bay front buildings equipped with enough solar panels to generate power for the neighborhood! I see a waterfront made up of diverse residences and businesses. A true neighborhood that is open even when businesses are closed, and is accessible to all, not just those who happen to be hotel guests. My husband and I recently visited Victoria, BC. We were enchanted with the public boardwalk that stretched from a residential neighborhood, where our bed and breakfast was located, past a local pub/brewery, by the marina, and some luxury hotels and finally over the bridge to Victoria. We watched seaplanes taking off and landing on their bay and saw people traveling to and fro on water taxis. It is this exciting memory that prompts a desire for something similar in Chula Vista. How wonderful it would be to join the new bay front development with the exemplary Sweetwater River trails and the Imperial Beach and Silver Strand walkway. I want to preserve, enhance and showcase what is uniquely Chula Vista. Gun Powder Point and the Western Salt Company are to Chula Vista what the Hotel Del is to Coronado. In my vision, the bay front development would include and glory in these historical landmarks. Having a rail system to join the bay cities seems a wonderful idea to me. What better way to bring San Diego tourists to our jewel by the bay! And, Chula Vistans could take the train to the new Padres' ballpark (there is no parking downtown San Diego) then home again to celebrate after the game at EI Torito! ~~+~{~ ~~~tfJ ~¡¡ , ~5 :" ~e.vw,,' /cler"" Csz t 9 +21) - eo¡-ð 1 Dear Mr Hooter; I will state a few of the reasons why I am in agreement for building the Bay Front Village Project. What The City of Chula Vista is trying to do is make the City of Chula Vista more of an attraction to tourists as well as to the regular population almost like a synopsis to the "Downtown San Diego." Because the City of Chula Vista is very close to Downtown San Diego, it would be the ideal location to provide funding to create condominiums and nice motels for tourists who visit throughout the year. Not only would the tourists come to visit the City of San Diego, but the City of Chula Vista could also become a main tourist attraction as it is very close to the San Diego Zoo and Sea World. If you think about it, more tourists attractions means more tourists, more money for the City, and more funding for schools. I think you should make Chula Vista more fun. You should build something in Chula Vista that teen kids would like such as a paint ball arenas because the paint ball arenas are far away from here. Another thing that the City should build is a recreational center that would keep kids off the streets (kids who live in Chula Vista, and for the kids that travel with parents.) The City should also make a mall for the teens and adults that have music stores and video games. Another attraction would be a smoke shop for adults so they can lounge aroood while their kids are playing at the paint ball arenas or listening to music at the music stores. llis is a cycle that could benefit not only the City, but the city schools as well. llis would create jobs for students as well as helping the poverty level for the City. llis is why I feel the expansion for the Bay Front Village would benefit the population for the City of Chula Vista. Thank you Mr. Hooter for you time I hope you can build these things for Chula Vista. ~ ¡""C e r~ !::I ~1 ~Vo.:'fe~ ~() 0 (oy~ K~~ 'ó-t Uf,(.ê\""-,, ~-, Cr,UdCì V¡~b CAQjqiD '-j ,)'þ Dear Mr. Hunter, I am for the Bay Front Village project. I think it is a good idea that you build it. It would be a lot more easier for people to get ajob because there wi]] be more job openings ,since stores will be opening and they would need to hire. If you build this project a lot more people wi]] have a place to live. The buildings wou]d look nice and light that part of San Diego with nice looking skyline set up. So keep up the good work and keep on with the p]ans that you guys have. It would also be cool if you put a Guitar Center some where in you p]ans I guarantee you would make good business with it since all the other ones are pretty far away. Sincerely, Kristian Sanchez May 29, 2001 Suite 100, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1121 Tel: (619)429 7946 Certified Mail No. 7000 1670 0006 0597 2213 MEMORANDUM , ,,<,' ,') TO: :. 1 I", "L i J,:J,', ",,, ' ,) state of,California, state Energy andiConservation Commission Resources Development FROM: '. .William E. Claycomb, President i:,~i~,;;:}:':ry';.'.":; ';, <<t/~~. '!SUBJECT:", Testimony for SPECIAL MEETING 'DURING THE BUSINESS MEETING.oNMAY 30,2001, concerning SAVE OUR BAY, INC.'s Petition forHiReconsideration of the Commission' s Decision approving the OTAy':"MESAiGENERATING PROJECT proposed by PG&E National Energy ; '" ',..I->.i:. ' "" 'Group i ;."..,1 On,,:Dec., 11, 1999, and March 6, 2000, even before we became an intervenor in ,the Otay Mesa Generating Project" Appl. for Cert. ;99':':AFC'.l:5'tl)We",wrote you Commissioners letters about .gh?tovol~aics 'alld!:!\!,EM'~!'fuel';n~e~ as solutions to the ,global warm~ng cr~sis. FortunatelY,iand coincidentally photovoltaics and PEM fuel cells ",'are':'aJsosolutions to California I s electricity price and energy cri'ses. ~ You', so far, have chosen not to evaluate two studies (reports) about photovoltaics which describe how cheap photovoltaic solar panels ,.,can ,be produced. The panels would produce electricity ,fo'r,7..8C1:,per kilowatt hour which in the future will outcompete other("forms ,of electricity production. Of course once you ::evaluafe::;these studies, you will obviously have to require PG&E National!r;Energy'Group (or is it Otay Mesa Gen. Proj.) to..!!!i.U9~ ,thej,r{arinilill emissions of 1,787,040.tons (their figure) of carbon dioxfOe each year. , ~, ,Now, if you still, are not convinced that global warming is a prOblem, you should consider the ~enl: sta.t~J!lent from Sc:,L:!cPIls "i'IriFiti t-nt-i on' of n""'''noqraphy (The San Diego Union-Tribiii'ie~ Fri. 'ApriltI13; 2001, page B1). Scripps research indicated that ';'increa$es . in ocean temperatures were a sign of global warming :flllost,,'jlikely the result of greenhouse gases produced by human 'Pa:C'flV'lty.. The lead author of the Scripps paper presented in :"i:the"')\pril' 13th journal, "Science", said, "we were sort of stunned ! ~ : ! page 1 of 2 , I \. / I '" I j/e", , MAY 2 9 200t . . . when we saw how good the agreement was." historical data with a computer simulation). (of the actual 'C separate team, working independently at the Princeton, N. ,"J ~'la.boratory of the National Oceanographic Data Centexl_National ':';oceanic, ann Atmospheric Adminlstratlon '-a'rrived at tli.e--same : conclusion' and had its paper publIshed in the same Apri 1 13th " ,'issue of "Science". The head of the Climate Change Research 'Section at the Center said the Scripps researchers did "a 'fantastic job" of correlating the computer data to the real world. \1~~:;:f'r: :. Rif> :'~'}":' .., i'~~" ~'J,;' : :'1 ;','" If just that isn't enough to give you chills, listen to some quotes from the Summary for Policymakers, A Report of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change THIRD Assessment. (See attached MEMORANDUM dated May 28, 2001; SUBJECT: Summary for policymakers _ _ _ THIRD Assessment) (Here Read para 1 re authors, editors reviewers and 114., 7., 8., 9., 13., 17., 20., 22., 23., 24., 27. and 28.) If you want to know how you and the rest of the world will be affected, get the report of Working Group II. . -;,,~ If you want to know what to do about it go to Working Group III. Ii,;'.' '.;.'.'. I.,,::' Finally, explain the word, photovoltaics to Gray Davis. never heard him use it. Maybe you must convince Lynn first. We've Schenk If you I re not with my own. '"'em'rd, ,'1] proy 1h~':i7i:7;:::;:' page 2 of 2 409 Palm Ave., Suite May 28, 2001 /,/ 11/ / t1now no a.fa depository of the ultimate powers of ih. aoclety but th. people themselves, and ,: "tr.,)'e think them not enl1qhtened enough .. erciae their control with a aonoe diseretion, the rellledy Is f> '0 take it fro," the", but to inform their - Thomas Jefferson dtaero,,,tton. September 26. _I 100, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1121 Tel: (619)429 7946 Certified Mail No. 7000 1670 0006 0597 2213 Return Receipt Requested MEMORANDUM TO: Global Warming Files FROM: William E. Claycomb, President SUBJECT: Summary for POlicymakers, A Report of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Third Assessment The Xhird AssessID~n~~PQrt,was prepared by 122 coordinating Lead Authors, 515 Contributing Authors, 21 Review Editors and 337 Expert Reviewers. Delegations of 99 IPCC member countries participated in the Eighth Session of Working Group I. They reported that: 1. there has been a widespread retreat of mountain glaciers in non-polar regions during the 20th century [page (p) 4], y 2. global average sea level rose between .1 AND .2 meters during the 20th century (p 4), 3. since 1950 there have been fewer extreme low temperatures and more extreme high temperatures (p 4), 4. El Ninos have been more frequent, persistent and intense since the ~id 1970's compared with the previous hundred years (p 5), 5. in parts of Asia and Africa the frequency and intensity of droughts have increased in recent decades (p 5), 6. emission of greenhouse gases and aerosols due to buman activities continue to alter the atmosphere in ways that are expected to affect the climate (p 5), 7. concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases and their warming effect (watts per square meter) have continued to increase as a result of human activities (p 7), 8. the present CO2 concentration has not been exceeded page 1 of 3 '- MAY 2, \) 11101 , , I during the past 420,000 years and likely (66-90% chance) not during the last 20 million years (p 7), 9. about 75% of man-caused emissions of CO during the past 20 years is due to fossil fuel burning (p 71, 10. the present methane concentration has not been exceeded during the past 420,000 years (p 7), 11 . natural century small changes due to the 11-year solar cycle are a factor making small changes in climate of the past (p 9), 12. two major natural factors (solar variation and volcanic eruptions) would have caused global cooli~g during the past 2-4 decades but have not offset the-global warming caused by man (p 9), 13. confidence in climate model prediction of future climate has increased (p 9), 14. model simulation of El Ninos has improved (p 9), 15. there is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is caused by man (p 10) , 16. human influences will continue to change atmospheric composition throughout the 21st century (p 12), 17. in 1750, the CO2 atmospheric concentration was 280 ppm; to stabilize the concentrations at 450 ppm would require reducing man-caused emissions within a few decades to below 1990 levels with steady decreases after that (p 12), 18. from 1990 to 2100, global average surface temperature will increase by 1.4 to 5.8% C (p 13), 19. these increases will be greater than predicted in the Second Assessment Report of 1995 (p 13), 20. this rate of warming is very likely (90-99% chance) to be greater than any during the last 10,000 years (p 13), 21. by the Second half of the 21st century, it is likely (66-90% chance) that precipitation will have increased over northern mid-to high latitudes and very likely (90-99% chance) to vary more year to year (p 13), 22. during the 21st century there will be higher maximum temperatures and more hot days over nearly all land areas, increase of heat index (temperature and humidity affecting human comfort) over most land areas, more intense precipitation events over many areas, increased summer continental drying and risk page 2 of 3 ... MAY 282001 of drought over most mid-latitude continental interiors (p 15), 23: beyond 2100, ocean transfer of heat to northern Europe , (by the conveyer belt current from the North Pacific) could ~ completely.and possibly irreversibly shut down (p 16), 24. the Greenland ice sheet is likely (66-90% chance) to lose mass (The freshwater going into the ocean would make worse the conveyer belt current shut down) (p 16), '"' 25. global mean sea level is expected to rise .09 to .88 meters by 2100 (p 16), 26. man-caused climate change will persist for many centuries (p 17), 27. about a quarter of the increase in CO2 concentration caused by emissions today will still be in the atmosphere several centuries from now (What a legacy for PG&E National Energy Group to leave behind it.) (p 17), 28. ice sheets will continue to react to climate warming and contribute to sea level rise for thousands of years after climate has been stabilized (p 17), 29. to estimate (model) future emissions and their impact, various possible future developments in the world (population, energy production methods, information sharing, economic growth, cultural and social interactions, technological development) (~ were assumed but no scenarios were included that explicitly assumed implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or the emissions targets of the Kyoto Protocol (a safe pessimistic procedure) (p 18)~J/tJll. _ ,C, 30. HAVE A NICE DAY 7{~~, page 3 of 3 ~ October 3, 2002 Dear Mr. Steve Padilla: I don't think it's a good idea to put all these new things in Chula Vista because it's already crowded as it is. These new plans would make the schools over crowded and Chula Vista High is already at it's max peak. That's about 6,000 more people in Chula Vista and about 25,000 more car trips, daily. Plus the new houses would be on the marsh of the wild life. I think most people would agree with me. If you're planning to do something there, put a new Basketball court or a new recreation center. Or bring a Basketball team to San Diego and locate it in Chula Vista. But You're saying what do I know about the city's plans and yeah I care more about sports than the city's plans. That doesn't mean I don't care what goes on in Chula Vista. I would really appreciate if you would write back Sincerely Rogelio Cardenas Dear Mr. Hunter, I would like to take this time to discuss a serious matter with you. The Bayfront Village Project. I am opposed to the making of this project for the fallowing reasons. It would be located right by sensitive wetlands. These wetlands are home to many sensitive and endangered plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. This project will be a major disturbance both to the wetlands and the people who enjoy them. Where will my kids go to fish? Where will they go to "chill- out"? Did you ever stop to think about this? The consequences of this project. Even if you still decide to go ahead with the project, at least consider reducing the size of the project. Thank you for your time. Please write back. Sincerely, Carlos Sanchez ~~~~'<,~ October 10, 2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, It came to my attention that natural resources in our region are building more cars and will contribute to over crowd our schools. Their also making more schools bigger because of the population here. Down south (T.J) they are also making more houses which is a very good idea due to the poverty level. The population here in Chula Vista is growing rapidly. A lot of teenagers are having kids and growing up to fast. And I really think that you as an educated adult you should think about it and make a difference in our community. I would greatly appreciate it if would reply and share your opinions to me. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. - Angelica Laguna ~A~s~~~~V~enNum~i$#tNu~R1~aJ~~~%s~~}~~~qW~t+AYV~~.L%!aPI.lA~.[JjzwrconN^09 ~&i~'~a~&~iw~~~~~~!if##~~~~.~~~~~it~*#I~~Wm~~..glm~a~~s~i&O~a~f Oct. 3, 2002 Dear. Mr. Hunter The city of Chula Uista has requsted the uiews of the public on the proposed Bayfront uillage project for the Chula Uista bayfront by Pacifica Deuelopment. I t is directly adjacent to sensitiue wetland habitats in the Bay and the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitiue plants and animals that are sensitiue to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the uery eKistence of the wildlife refuge areas. I am strongly opposed to this deuelopment because it is too dense and intense for this area, it will haue deuastating impacts on the sensitiue natural resources in the region, pollute our air and water, and will clog our already crowded streets with ouer 24,000 additional car trips a day, and will contribute to ouercrowding in our schools, and will destroy open space for people Iiuing in western Chula Uista and National City. There are many eKcellent alternatiues for deuelopment at this site that will not cause the same deuastating impacts as this project will cause. Three alternatiues haue been proposed by labor, enuironment, and community groups and should be fully analyzed as part of the enuironmental process. Each community alternatiue will prouide significant benefits to the economy and local residents uersus the uery negatiue impacts of the proposed project. Please, send the deuelopment back to the drawing board to propose a more sensible project that will accessible and use able by the local residents, will protect the enuironment, and will enhance, not degrade, our quality of life. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this uery important project for South County and San Diego Bay. Sincerely, \'1~~~~ Garcia .v~~$. Dear: Mary Salas My t'UM'neI W L~ 'BrMOj M\.dt I /MtlI very CO'Y\.CEWn.edt about the- ~ ~ CO'Y\.CEWVW of the- peopLe" ~ the- A~ ~et-t: I do-n/t wCW'lt to- w~ YO1M' tttne- wU'hr ~ worM- M\.dt ~ phr~ I do-n/t wCW'lt to- ~ YO1M' ~ wU'hr cWL ~ worM- iA1t hope- thca" yow ~ wr~e- ~ Le.tte.t- oo..c.k;, I lIMit wCW'lt to- lil1ft"e.e- wU'hr EWEWYO'Y\.el e-4e- thca" ~ W net" a- VEWY ~~. NO't ~ walt the- ~ be- out of the-i.r Ilo-m.e" but ~ ~ lIMit ~ cUe- 01'\1 the- w~ to- ~ CM'ItJoww plNl.<;,e; to- Uve-. NO't to- ~ the- ~ thca" ca-n.t lIMit ~l&' watk- aw~ ~ ~ ~hEwe-~, whEwe- walt yow p,a tJwmv cWL? 1'hcU;'~ lIMit the- bU-~ but the- peopl,e, a;tt~ e~ vL.$-ta- ~ ~ c:Ucne- CM"e- OVEW Cf"owd.e.tL, ~ ~ WM' ~ for ~ 1000 peopl,e, we- CW"Y~ hcwe- 2600 ~ a;tt~ eVIlS. elM'll yow ~ hew ~ mere- t~~ out of 6000 mere- Y~ y01Al'/L be- p~ iA1t e~ VL.$-ta-? ~ W b€:Yondt ~ IM'II ~a- buckt, ~ W OVfWpop~ic"YII. WU'hr cWL the- 6000 mere- Y~ y01Al'/L need.- mere- {ooiL to- ~ tJwmv wU'hr M' if ~ city w~t &YEW {towWlAJ' wU'hr T01M'~. What' walt hctppfWII wn..e..w t~~ CCM1.t" ~ to- the- beachEw or the-i.r fr;wor~e- ~ ~ ~'ve- be..Ew\t buat &YEW? ~ walt ~~ hom.et M\.dt wafte- ~'Ye- UvEW aw~ iA1t the-i.r YO'O"m/So' ~ ~. So-wz.e., peopl,e, ciepe-nd- 01'\1 thca" tttne- of the- ~ to- ~ out of the- ~ ~ de- ~ what' about 01M' c:hCLdf-fWII? ~'Ye- UvEW walt EWfWII be- effeci:~ by yO1M' ~~, what'tJwwIt? We- CM"e+1/t ~ to- be- ~ to- ten.. tJwmv to- Lec:we- 01'\.CeI ~ CM"e- hEwe-, lIMit thcNI.lct of cWL the- ~ t'J1Cb1- the..t-e- walt be- wn..e..w yow 'b-u.adt YO1M' 'B~ from: v~ S~~. Let:~ brcwo- Dear Mr. Hunter, I am writing to you today to explain why I am apposed to the Bay Front Project. Now my fist reason is that right next to this project you have The National Wildlife Refuge. Now you ask yourself what does this have to do with you? Well if you proceed with this project a lot of the wildlife their will mostly be extinct and knowing that the refuge is next to project doesn't look good on you. My second reason, Well lets say you do go threw with the project do you know how overcrowded its going to get? The grocery shop are going to be full, the streets are going to be full of cars and imagine the schools as id they where not already crowded. Then after that we are going to have to start building more houses that soon will be on top of each other like the houses a cross the border. The worst thing will be all the pollution that all the people will be making. My final reason of why I disagree with your project is that if you build all these houses factories buildings etc. in this beautiful place you will be taking away a place where I used to go with my family to go fish have a picnic and swim. This is my most important reason because I think having a place to relax where my family could have fun is way better than having to overcrowd the city. Thank you for taking the time and reading my letter please write back to me. Sincerely, Luis Torres Dear Mary Salas, I strongly oppose the dense, concrete proposed by the Pacific:b~~J'~,1c?J.m;~~rt for the North Bay Front. I think that they should more smaller. Maybe a school or a food store. If they build a school, it will be much better because that way we can have more precaution for kids, or old people. What I mean by that is that if they build what they are planing to build there will be more than 25 thousand people invading yours and everybody's space. A market will be my second opinion. Because that way it wont get that much crowded. Or they can build something that will help this society be better. They shouldn't build something that is going to crowd our world, more than it is. Or either something that its going to make more money for the government. Sincerely, Guillermina. Fuentes Ps-write back if you wish so. Dear Mary Salas, 10/2/02 I'm opposed to the BayFront Village Project, which will be located next to the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge . Also there are going to be more people and more traffic, especially for me , because I live on J street. It's probably going to affect me, there is going to be more traffic. Places are going to be more crowded, especially schools, because theirs already 40 students for each teacher and the more students their is the harder it is for the teacher to teach or to keep track. If students don't learn their isn't a good future for my kids or even your kids. So I feel you should reconsider and just leave it the way it is, please do me a favor and write me back. Thank you Gaby Jara Dear Mr. Hunter, I'm opposed to the bay front village project. There are a couple of reasons why I'm opposed to it. We need to the think the dangeIs that this is going to cause to OUI community. Think about the major pollution that this is going to bring to Chula Vista alone. There will be 25000 additional daily car trips, that means 25000 will be putting OUI children in danger of getting run over. Were will OUI children play if cars are going to be all over the place, we cant always take them to a park that's a couple ofrniles away from OUI house. What is most important heIe is the pollution that cars are going to bIing. That means more children are going to be affected with asthma and OUI skies will be polluted. There are many other alternatives to the bay front village project. Maybe think about decreasing the size of the plan, making it smaller so that we can still go out and enjoy a beautiful city like Chula Vista. Another gIeat alternative is taking it somewhere else that might need something like this. I hope you do take my letteI into consideration. I would really appreciate a Iesponse. Sincerely, Nestor Aguilar Dear Mary Salas, I am apposed to the development because I think that it will just cause more problems. There's going to be 6,000 more people in the city. This is just going to make more crowded schools, which our school is already crowded enough. When the eU rings to go to the next period, at lunch, and at nutrition break, everybody Is bumping Into each other and some students are tate to their ctasses because we can't get through. Then we get detention because now they made a rule that if your late you get detention. Why? Because theirs too many of us, we don't need more students. Their will be 25,00 more cars in the streets and in the freeway. With people trying to get to thew home, work, and school. We already have enough traffic. I come from National City everyday and theirs a lot of traffic going on. Their would be even more people getting late to work. Then some could even get fired because some bosses or managers don't care about them getting stuck in traffic. Maybe they could make something else. Maybe a place that would keep teenagers out of trouble, drugs, fights, gangs, etc. A place that we would like to be at w~th out causing any trouble, that is fun. A place where different students from different schools could spend some time. Where teens could spend time with other teens and communicate from different schools. I think that would be much better than having more traffic and much better than over crowded schools. Please write me back and let me know what you think. Than you for taking your time in reading my opinion. Thank You, Mayra A. Lopez 1213 EAve. # 30 National City, Ca. 91950 Dear MR. Hunter; Now that you want to built all those house on an ecologic area, where are you going to take you children or grand children to play? I'm totally opposed to the Bay Front Village , now where do you think I will go fish? or play?? What are you going to do with all the animals that live there? Are you going to kill theme? What about schools? School are overcrowded what are you going to do with all those kids? Put them in my overcrowded school? PLEASE DON BUILD BA YFRONT VILLAGE. Thank you very much Sincerely Jose Gomez Dear Mr. Hunter, I am against the Bayfront Village project because it is adjacent to the wildlife refuge. It's also not a good idea because of its size. The size of this project could threaten the very existence ofthe wildlife refuge areas. The areas have too many endangeIed and sensitive plants and animals that don't like noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. At least consider building other things besides huge skyscrapers. Projects that maximize park and open space, cultural and recreation centers and lower density projects greatly reduce the negative impacts and incIease quality of life for Iesidents. No one who lives in the Chula Vista area who has to go to work everyday will appreciate 3,400 additional residential units OI 6,000 additional residents or 25,000 more daily car trips congesting our roads. All that I'm asking is to consider these options and look at the additional people, houses, and car trips and maybe build something else that's not as big or just make this project smaller. Please don't pave our paradise. Please write back. Sincerely, Edward Pauter 480 Nickman Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 September 7, 2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, I am strongly opposed to the Bay Front Village project. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitive plants and animals. This project will clog already crowded streets and schools. There are many alternatives for development at the site that will not cause devastating impacts. For example, creating ajungle like forest for the sport of playing paintba11. It will not harm plants or animals actually this could attract many plants and animals. Another alternative is to create an extreme park for all aggressive inline skaters, skateboarders, and stunt cyclists. In Conclusion I do not agree you should proceed with project, and please try and take these alternatives into consideration. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this. Please send the development back to the drawing board. Sincerely, Christian Hernandez H~ October 03,2002 Dear Mr. Hunter I want to tell you that I am opposed to the Bay Front Village plan project that is being planned here in the city ofChula Vista. ldon't feel that it's right. There are other ways to do this, I think building something small instead of ". building something big, it will bring more people to our city. We must protect our wildlife, and try not to destroy the habitat and bring the animals to extinction. Try to imagine every block filled with cars and air filled with smelly smog, making our air difficult to breathe. More people will make our schools over crowded and make it harder for students to get into good schools. I want to thank you reading this letter and I hope you keep this in mind. Sincerely Mark Sullivan (])ear :Mr.J{unter, It fias 6een 6rougfit to my attention tfiat the city of Chufa Vista decided to construct more and more fiouses. I do not 6eueve tfiat's fair; tliis city is getting to crowded and" it's a uving fie{{ to get tfiroUfJfi tfiese streets, can you imagine fiow fiUfJe tliis popufation is going to grow? q'rust me tfiat's fiUfJe, you are constructing liouses on top of fii{Cs, and mountains your 6Cocking tfie wfioCe area, and you ftnow peopCe u/ig to go fiiking! rrliis city was good fiow it was, you need to Ceave it aCone! We just want to 6e free, liappy, and" not worry a60ut traffic, 50 can you pCease stop!!! *rrlianftyouforyourtime* ^CPCease write me 6acft^ 5incereCy, jlCe~ndra (j@driguez Dear Mary Salas, Building extra houses and skyscrapers in Chula Vista is not a good idea. The main reason is the Sweetwater Wild refuge, all the animals there won't have a place to live. Most of those animals willlikelymdie. You will be partially responsible for all the animal deaths in the area. Building all those houses also means 6,000 more people in Chula Vista. Our school is already crowded enough. Students can barely get throgh the halls without bumping into someone. Traffic will be crazy and almost imposible to get through. More traffic also means more pollution from cars or factories. All of the traffic will cause massive car lines because of you, Instead of a city you can build a really huge park. It should have basketball courts, a jim, eating locations,ect. A huge park would be useful for kids to go play in. Kids need somewhere fu to go on weekendsand a park is a perfect solution.Thank you for your time please write back. Sincerily Joel Adair Dear Mr. Hunter: I am opposed to the building of the Bayfront Village. Some of the reasons are: It is directly adjacent to sensitive wetland habitats in the Bay and at the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. Due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. It will have devastating impacts on the sensitive natural resources in the region, pollute air and water, and will clog our already crowded streets with over 25,000 additional car trips a day, will contribute to overcrowding in our schools. The light-footed Clapper Rail is already on the Endangered Species list. Lights, noise, predators and other stresses on the breeding population will make a bad problem worse. Also, a recent study found that hospitalization rates for asthma are 23% higher in South Bay than the rest of the Country. There are many excellent alternatives for development at this site that will not cause the same devastating impacts of the proposed project. Other projects should be pursued. Projects that maximize park and open space, cultural and retreat centers and lower density projects greatly reduce the negative impacts and increase quality of life for residents. I would greatly appreciate it if you could please right back. Thank You. Sincerely, Ariadne Garcia October 4,2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, I'm strongly opposed to the Bay Front project. In my opinion you are not thinking about the community, or the communities opinion. You are also not thinking about the habitats in the Bay. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances and predation. I seriously think people in my community disagree with this project. Our city is going to be overpopulated. You should think about the education of children and teens in school. Schools are already overpopulated. There are many different options for this project. You could build many other things. An educational museum or a theme park could be pretty interesting. A good idea would be to build something that would teach people karate or dancing, swimming or something that could be recreational. If you really want to build this project please be considerate to the community and build it a little smaller. I would like to hear from you soon. Sincerely, lliana Vazquez Dear Mary Salas, I am very concerned about what I've been hearing. I don't agree with the fact that we are building Bayfront Village. Traffic will be increasing because more and more people will over populate the city with their children and themselves. There is already a large amount of people living here, and with a lot of people here, stores will be crowded, parks will be filled will people. I just don't want this beautiful city to turn into another tourist attraction. I hope you read this short letter, because I put a lot of thought of what to say. I just want to hear your thoughts and feelings, so please if you have time have time write back. P.5. Thanks for your time' Sincerely, CR.f.>(si{ Ser60 October 4,2002 Dear Mr. Hunter, I am opposed to the Bay Front project. Because this will affect the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are home to many endangered and sensitive plants and animals that are sensitive to noise, light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. It is due to the size of this project, it could threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas. Many people like to go to the Bay because they like it just the way it is. There are many excellent alternatives for development at this site that will not cause the same devastating impacts, as this project will cause. This project will also cause traffic of cars. You should be considerate of the community. This Bay has stayed the same for many years, and we hope to enjoy the nature of the Bay, as we have in the past years of our life's. We hope that our future children will have the same joy. Please answer my letter. Thank You, Nayeli Tagle Dear Mr. Hunter, I am writing to you because I strongly disagree with your dissension to build the Bayfront Villages here in Chula Vista. It will just cause more people then there already is in Chula Vista and make the schools more populated and the traffic worse. One of the big reasons I disagree is it will bring more people here. It will also threaten the very existence of the wildlife refuge areas at the Sweetwater National wildlife refuge. Most of the endangered plants and animals are sensitive to noise light, pollution, disturbances, and predation. If you do build the Bayfront Villages and just totally discard this letter I have one request can you build a lot of basketball corurts will a basketball gym open 24/7. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Daniel Valdez (!~id'l \- l:-,,:i j J i~',li ',,,h,),-i :-;:i! I:,'mlh \\,.~Ili_; (Iidb \-i';(,L C'\ q!,)! I Ocwlwr \.',1U0:2 \'tJ>nr alld Cll\ CI..'IHKll .:'7(1 Founh i\\Cl1UC ('hub \'i"u. Ci\ '-II'll') Dear I'vl<, \tln SatlS J 'm Ih.::rc cGmmlll1ic~lll!'lg \\jth .\ ()L! ()l\ behalf of !l1~Ifl.\ Chll!;1 Vi'>la cHi/Cllt.;. i\ sinccn,: l:omlllelll OI,ll!1C B;I.\fmnt Vil!:lgC project. ']-hl~; project has c:!uscd crilltnwcrs.\ :lnd m:1Jl' \11;\11:, cl(i/L'IlS \H\comforuhlc on the l~lCl tll:H lhi<; prCljcct is;1 dis:H;h;mt;lgi..:: w the cil.\ (lrChula \l<;Li 1 r this pro.1l',-~1 is cOl1~;truclcd it\\(JUld lx' the cause of the d(:~lths oj !ll~l!l.\ speCIes ill lhe S\\Cd\\:llC'l \"\ iJdlifC refuge. The pn~jcc! \\ ! C\tcrmilwk' the cCOS:ISh:J11' th~lt Uki.' refuge there That \\ill rnc:m that rn~lll.\ citi/ells \\ il1 no! laki: their sons J'lshing or to ('11.10.\ <I simple d,l:- in :1 lEI/ural habitll Ili:(' l1l:1kmg, ollhlS prt:lcct \\ il bring (,Ol.ll) ~lddillon:d n.'sldcnts [0 tllt: ;drc:ld~ mCl"C!\)\\dcd C IndJ \"isla ~chools_ (ll)OO people 11k;11l !lWtL: pollu1ion. mm..::: C:irs :n our alrcndy clogged wads Th;I!"s \yhy \\c slrnl1g,!:- LIWlf 'ihat Prc~fccl l~'la! I'rollt \'ilbgc should be cmcclcd or 1l10\\\.i t() b~t!cr locltloJ1 \\ here our \-1ildlifc \\tluldn't be in harms \-\;iY Tkl1lk ~ ou for the flpportunil} or di5cus<;in,:'_ \11th you ,I \CI'\ il1lr){)rt~1111 suh.:c.::CL J \\lil be \\;llting for \OUf rcspon:-::c Sincerel,. Ern.:-sto H,Ulll~.\n Jr 1)(1 Iht' rIg!}! Illin,'..!, i Dear, Mary Salas My name is Elio and I'm a student at Chula Vista High. I write to you because I heard of that Bay Front Project the city is trying to build. I also noticed that it is going to be a big project and is going to take a lot of land. You might see it as a great opportunity to bwld homes for people but the city is crowded enough especially here at CVHS the school has taken 1000 more people than its capacity. There are at least 40 students in each period, which is really crowded. I think it will affect Chula Vista very dramatically with more people and more traffic. It also is going to take a lot of space that could be used for other stuff like building a park for kids to play in and stay out of trouble where parents could take their kids to get away from the craziness of the city itself It won't affect the animals that live in that area because they could practically live in the park. My fInal word is I think Chula Vista has done enough building for a while. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter and will wait for your response patiently. Sincerely, Elio Navarro October 8, 2002 Dear Steve Padilla, I am opposed to the Bay front Project and I'm just writing you in concern of what is going to happen to that lot. Here are some of my opinions on what should happen to that lot. I would say you leave it as is. If you build houses there people would not have any where to relax and watch the sun set with their loved ones. It would take away too many memories and to build houses there would take away so many memories. If you plane on building something build something that will bring back memories to those who visit. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. Please respond as soon as you have the time and if you have any questions or concerns about what is written above. Thank-you once again and enjoy the rest of your day. Sincerely. Bianca Garcia A student from Chula Vista High, sc, hool() L C/O Davalos &Wo ~1ClQ Dear Mr. Hunter, There will be so many curious birds and animals around. The shapes of their delicate bodies are quite tender. Groups of species living among each other, living with out a care, except for when they wonder about their next meal. Some ofthose who are in danger of their species being wiped out of this world, some because humans were the reason to their tragedy, just living the rest of their life in their habitat. There will be so many species dying off, because of the scale of these projects, so many will be at the hands of human mercy. You will be the one taking away their natural habitat, their rights as creatures ofthis green Earth to pursuit their happiness, their freedom to live. Your hands will be closing on their life, and your eyes will be scolding them to their graves, if you continue with the plans of these atrocious projects. I agree, the Bayfront Village might strike money into our neighborhoods, it will most likely raise the economy, and it may even attract new people. However, take a second and scrutinize the situation for a moment. Aren't our neighborhoods crowded enough? What else will it bring, other than currency? This enormous project will bring more traffic. Now everyone knows that large amounts of cars on the roads will bring pollution to the site. That means that my three-month-old niece has a greater chance of having asthma for the rest of her life. It means that the deaths of our natural creatures, those of humans and animals are going to be more likely. One other question I want to ask where are you planning on baring the corpses ofthe living creatures that are killed because of this brilliant project? Your best decision will be to change the location of the Bayfront Village. Even deciding to reduce the impact on the Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge. Frankly, it's not much of a sacrifice, as to murder and affect all those free creatures, is it? Thank you for taking some of your time to read my letter, I hope I have had somewhat of affection on your opinion over this matter. Please, I hate to take more of your time, but I ask of you to respond to my letter. Sincerely, Henry Reynolds Dear Mr. Hunter: From my point of view the Bayfront Village project will cause much congestion and eviromental contaminationthat wiil affec the area of Chula Vista and National City. It will affect the fauna, birds, and it will contaminate the air as well as water. Our schools will get more overcrowded. It will crowd strets with over 24,000 additional car trips a day. It will also destroy open space for people in Chula Vista and National City. I believe that with an environmental study and with the help of the community this problem could be solved. Thank you very much for reading my letter. I hope to hear from you soon. Sincerely, Melissa c. de la Vara 492-C Oaklawn Ave. Chila Vista, CA 91910