A couple weeks ago we got some comments on the blog about the recent substantial conformance appeal.
Most of the sports fields are in the potential adverse health effects zone where the children will be breathing the diesel and car fumes. That fact didn't seem to bother Council members Stocks, Bond, Houlihan, and Gaspar.
And it was Stocks, Bond, Houlihan, and Gaspar who DECIDED not to talk about the toxic air pollution. anon 12:15:What part of "children breathing toxic air fumes" don't you understand? Build the park so that the children won't be breathing diesel and car exhaust fumes.This reflected the side that said if you were for sports fields you don't care about kids. Another,
Toxic fumes? Please! This is a ruse to stop the park! Plain and simple. Scare people and delay the park ,that is what this is about. We are talking about exposure maybe two hours a day, two or three days a weeek a few times a year and your worried about it. ... Oh yeah, what about all those citizens and children who live along the I-5 corridor, are you going to tell me they are going to have health issues too.This reflected the side that said if you brought up the health issue you must be full of crap and don't care about kids and only want to keep a park from being built.
And a quote from THE CITY OF ENCINITAS submission to Caltrans (which the city was happy to keep secret from most of the public),
"At the request of the City of Encinitas, Scientific Resources Associated (SRA) has conducted a technical review of the Air Quality Section of the Draft EIS/EIR, and a technical review of the Air Quality and Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) Analyses provided as appendices to the Draft EIS/EIR. General comments on the analysis are as follows:
• There is substantial evidence in published studies that demonstrate that residents and sensitive receptors, including children, experience adverse health effects from freeway air emissions. None of these studies were discussed or evaluated in the Draft EIS/EIR for the Interstate 5 North Coast Corridor. SRA has provided a list of current studies in the attached literature review that summarize the available evidence.
• The analysis does not address the potential for impacts to additional receptors to due the widening of the I-5 corridor, which will result in travel lanes placed from 48 to 73 feet closer to existing land uses in the vicinity of the freeway. The California Air Resources Board, in their Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, recommend that sensitive receptors not be sited within 500 feet of a freeway due to potential adverse health effects."Does this mean the city administration both hates kids and wants to derail the Hall park?
Now, from Dr. Rothe's editorial in the Coast News makes it clear that there are legitimate health risks to living and exercising next to a freeway,
Studies by USC Keck School of Medicine indicate that, in areas polluted by vehicle exhaust, our most athletic children are three times more likely to develop asthma than inactive children....
In 2010, a new SDSU study measured UFP concentrations at 37 locations on both sides of I-5, just 3 miles south of the Hall site. These measurements contradict the erroneous assumptions on which the 2007 Hall EIR was based, namely that anyplace farther than 300 feet from I-5 is safe and that prevailing SW winds will put little pollution on the Hall site...
Another UCI research shows that children “are affected up to nine times more harshly than adults” by vehicular pollution. These results show that children exercising near freeways have a 27 times higher chance of developing asthma than inactive adults exposed to the same pollution levels. A 2000 Denver study found that children living within 800 feet of highways with 20,000 vehicles per day are six times more likely to develop cancer and eight times more likely to get leukemia.
The Hall sports fields are entirely within 800 feet of the expanded I-5...We can't be too harsh on the city. Take a look at the alternate park plan offered up by CQL for a community park (CQL is the group Jerome loves to scapegoat for his inability adopt a balanced budget that funds the park).
CLICK TO ENLARGE.
Alternate plan for the park. Submitted by Citizens for Quality of Life to the City of Encinitas during the EIR process. The plan demonstrates two things: The group had a vision for BUILDING the park, and they wanted to put the sports fields close to the freeway.