In 2002 the San Diego Port District announced that they were going to redevelop the Chula Vista bayfront. Most of what “bayfront” you see is fill, so that land belongs to the Port and they lease it out to businesses. The planning was done in a very public manner, and the first plan approved by the Citizens Advisory Committee featured a large 40-acre signature park in a prime site by the harbor. The signature park was to be the attraction that would draw people to the bayfront for concerts, 5K races, protest meetings, large celebrations, etc. . In time, that in turn would encourage businesses and eventually hotels.
Then Gaylord Hotels unexpectedly showed up, with their very unique business model. Their main clients are the conventions of mid-sized organizations, so they have their own clientele. This would give a huge push to the redevelopment, but they wanted the same site as our signature park. It was such a unique opportunity that we did not hesitate to agree. What happened to the signature park?
The best that could be done was to make the signature park a long linear park, starting near the nature center, hugging the bay southward, going in front of the Gaylord Hotel, and then on its southern side. But-it was to be one continuous park.
What Port planners have done is to bifurcate the linear park at its mid-point, a natural “choke point,” to be sure, but a choke point where just some imagination can overcome the obstacles. In effect, they have created a “neighborhood” park around the resort hotel and another “neighborhood” park far to the north, away from the harbor area. Whether intended or not, the result is to create a “rich man’s park” near the resort hotel and a “poor man’s park” further north. If you cannot afford a four-star hotel or a bayside condo or own a yacht, you belong in the northern “poor man’s” park. Of course that means most residents of Chula Vista.
We absolutely oppose the bifurcation of the signature park. We have recently received an encouraging letter from the Port planners, saying they will try to accommodate our wishes to overcome the obstacles in order to make it one, flowing park. We can only hope they will follow through.
The key meeting before the Coastal Commission is not scheduled until September of 2011. If we have reason to believe that the Port is not doing its best to follow through, we will take our case to the Coastal Commission. A couple of weeks ago, the Coastal Commission shot down the Port’s plan for downtown San Diego that exactly parallels ours, so we should have at least a 50-50 chance of prevailing. If we do prevail, the Port has to start all over again, resulting in probably a delay of years. We very much hope they will follow through in a sincere way to make it a truly “Signature Park.”
Watry is acting president of Crossroads II.
