Park plans provoke noise, traffic concerns
San Diego Union Tribune – San Diego,CA,USA
Last night, 100 residents, most of whom opposed the park, aired their views
at an Encinitas Planning Commission hearing on a draft environmental
review. …

ENCINITAS – Plans for what would be the city’s largest public park are being met with love and loathing.

Last night, 100 residents, most of whom opposed the park, aired their views at an Encinitas Planning Commission hearing on a draft environmental review.

The city has set aside 44 acres for the public park. The land, known as the Hall property for a former owner who operated a nursery there, borders a residential neighborhood south of Santa Fe Drive and west of Interstate 5.

The Planning Commission did not make a recommendation because it was only providing a forum for public comment on the park’s draft environmental review. The public can send written comments on the review until March 12.

Speakers insisted they are not NIMBYS but just wanted a community park, not a regional sports facility as planned.

Their main concerns were:

Traffic and congestion on neighborhood streets.

Parking overflowing near homes because the park would only have 420 parking spaces but peak use could attract 1,500 cars.

Noise and light spilling over into homes.

Park planners did not take into account the additional traffic generated by the proposed Scripps Memorial Hospital expansion and other projects to be constructed in the area.

“The park is a failure on paper. Don’t make it a failure in reality,” said Denny Wolfe. He and other opponents suggested:

Reducing the number of ball fields.

Increasing parking.

Not using lights at night.

On the other hand, Brian Buchholtz, a coach for Encinitas Express Soccer Club, urged the city to proceed with the park because youth sports don’t have enough fields.

“Let’s not procrastinate over a few silly issues any more,” he said. “If this is not the best for the city, what is?”

The city bought the land for $17.2 million in 2001 to create a $35 million public park with baseball and softball fields, a teen center, a swimming pool, skate park, dog park, children’s playgrounds and trails.

But the project has hit some bumps. In 2003, when the city cleared debris from the site, a group called Citizens for Quality of Life successfully sued the city, saying it should have done an environmental review of possible hazardous materials in the soil.

The city conducted the soil review as part of the environmental study that was discussed last night. It found the soil contained pesticides but the levels are not concentrated enough to harm park users.

While many residents and City Council members have said they are eager for the park to be, Citizens for Quality of Life recently raised concerns about traffic congestion, noise, lights at night disturbing neighbors and whether hazardous chemicals would be stirred up during construction.