Statement: “(Propositions B&C) increases pollution and health hazards in Barrio Logan,” a campaign mailer against Barrio Logan’s new community plan said.
Determination: A Stretch
Analysis: Many San Diego voters last week received a campaign mailer urging them to vote against Propositions B and C, two citywide measures that, if approved, would uphold the Barrio Logan community plan passed by the City Council last year.
City planners wrote the plan to end a problem that’s plagued Barrio Logan for decades: Residents and industrial businesses can be next-door neighbors.
In other neighborhoods, homes and industrial businesses are largely separated to protect residents’ health and to safeguard the businesses’ long-term prospects. It’s a rare case where planning jargon — “incompatible uses” — describes the issue clearly.
We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?
I would argue that it is not a stretch to say that
“(Propositions B&C) increases pollution and health hazards in Barrio Logan,”
because the environmental study did in essence compare the effect of separating
residential and industrial uses when it reported the expected net outcomes of the
The study compared the current plan, that doesn’t separate residential
and industrial uses, with the two proposed new plans that would. It found that by increasing the number of
people living next to the freeway, the more serious pollution source, the new
plan would actually increase the total number of people who are exposed to pollution
and health hazards; even with a new buffer zone separating residential and
If more people would be exposed to pollution with either of the
new plans, we would expect more people to visit the emergency room with asthma
incidents with either of the new plans. Health problems in Barrio Logan would therefore
be worse, not better with Propositions B&C.
If the freeway produces more pollution in Barrio Logan than local industry, why isn’t the City proposing a buffer zone between residents and the freeway?
Why don't we let the people who live and work in Barrio Logan have the biggest say in how they can improve their situation? It's not just the pollution, it's the insult of living next door to ship repair shops, a condition no other community in San Diego has to deal with. They themselves have said this is the first step towards making their neighborhood more livable.
Yes we should let the over 50,000 people who work in the
local maritime industry have a say in how to improve Barrio Logan, even if they
don’t live there. They do have a major stake in what happens in the community.
We can’t move the shipyards to Ramona, but we can find places for people to live in San Diego that aren’t next to ship repair yards. Why do we want to insult people by saying that that’s the only place we’ll allow poor people to live in this City?
@Sharon Gehl Congratulations on not choking on a statement like "places we allow poor people to live". Barrio Logan is not skid row, it's an community with a history. But that's besides the point because the community plan is not about kicking out the shipyards. It's about the people who live and work in Barrio Logan having a reasonable amount of control over their neighborhood. As another poster pointed out, there's plenty of people in San Diego who live along flight paths. But that doesn't mean the airport can do whatever it wants because "you can't rebuild an airport".
The entire San Diego region needs its shipbuilding industry in Barrio Logan. The current residents should welcome an opportunity to move up the hill to Logan Heights, where they could have clean air, views of the water, and access to transportation. Why can't the Planning Department get on board and create the appropriate zoning?
Buffer zones are about as effective as where the smoking and non smoking zones were on airplanes. Bario Logan should be all industrial and higher density should be allowed along the trolley line that runs through Logan Heights. Instead the city planners, in their new proposed zoning plan HAVE ACTUALLY DOWNZONED. Incompetence IS THE WORST form of corruption.
I'm leaning toward supporting the plan, but it feels almost futile despite adding a buffer zone. Maybe less noise pollution will result but, BL has a freeway to the east and a ship yard to its west...air pollution wise, its screwed unless you eliminate the 5 fwy, the yard, or the residents...and none of the 3 will happen. I support the right for the residents to have a say in their local development but I would simply not choose to live next to a dump and complain about the smell/flies...but then again, cost of living in SD may prevent folks from leaving. End result: crappy situation either way.
What residential area would not prefer a buffer between itself and heavy industry? In just about any other San Diego community this would be a slam dunk for the residents' wishes, but because Barrio Logan is viewed by some as populated by poor people deserving of their fate, there seems to be a mood among some that they should bow to the purported needs of a hegemonic industry group. Never mind that those same voices would cry out in anger were their own community's wishes subordinated in this manner.
Dresden la Logan you have to remind Jim Jones of the Grand Havana Cigar place downtown that condemned by the then redevelopment agency to be replaced by a hotel. Well they tore down the cigar place but the hotel was never built. Finally the city was sued by the prior owner for close to a million dollars and won his law suit. So much for J. J.'s "land being taken to build something better."
There is nobody calling to get rid of industry. Nobody is calling for that...yet. But if the plan fails June 3 I'll be the first to tell them to leave. No developers are pushing for the plan. Any body that says differently is lying.
@Chris Brewster I disagree with most of what Mark Giffin says, but he is right. This is not about poor people, or people at all. This is one of the few areas in the city where these jobs and industries can operate, and this industrial zone should be protected. A few residences can be relocated inland. Shipbuilding cannot.
@Desde la Logan So if we build more "affordable housing" in BL, it will just place more people in toxic air...kinda supports an Enviro Racism claim...
shipyards will go nowhere, 5 fwy will go no where...BL will just continue to have the air pollution problems it has...the only factor will be how many blocks will buffer between heavy industry and a person's living room...
It is what it is...
The bay is a regional asset Chris. That is why the region will weigh in on it.
It is an industrial area. That is the issue.... It is not about Barrio Logan being viewed by some as populated by poor people deserving of their fate.
That is B.S.
Mr. Giffin: There is an economic reason that the less affluent often live in areas bordered by industry or in other less desirable locations. Many here on the VOSD comment boards have referred to those making minimum wage, for example, as deserving of their fate. For similar reasons I think some voters will be much less caring about the impacts of industry on Barrio Logan because it’s … Barrio Logan (and not Clairemont, Point Loma, or La Jolla). They may argue that they are endeavoring primarily to protect an important industry, but I think economic snobbery is a very real aspect of this debate.
You want us to move because you believe the lies maritime industry shills are telling you? Read the plan and you'll realize the shipyards are going nowhere. We residents will stay until our last breath and fight these polluters at every step.
@Desde la Logan
No one is asking you to leave.
I was down at mini truck the other day. Guy down there said they were being told to move.
They have been there a long time also. Told me they were being moved because of the new ball park?
Actually, we are being told to leave. By maritime industry and internet trolls. Corporate polluter shills like Chris Wahl and Jerry Sanders have repeatedly said we should move. They don't want us here.
I live 2 blocks from Mini Trucks. Them being asked to leave because of a stadium that won't be built doesn't have anything to do with the plan. If they own the land they don't have to move. If they rent/lease the landlord can tell them to go. A stadium for the Chargers would be an incompatible use in the new plan and not allowed in Barrio Logan.
No idea. Just saying the guy at mini truck surprised me with that
@Jim Jones "If the area really gets redeveloped it will become gentrified and all the poor will be forced out."
That never happens without density limits.
@Jim Jones La Jolla has density limits. Thank you for proving my point.
As usual the leader of the Peoples Temple is wrong.
The plan specifically states that there can not be new residential developments on the waterfront. So there won't be condos where the shipyards are. Also, any new developments in the area where they are allowed will more than likely be affordable housing developments (like where I live). There has been one, small, market rate development in Barrio Logan built here in the last 40+ years while there have been at least seven affordable housing complex's built.
Nobody is going to pay $400,000+ to buy a condo with shipyard views and toxic pollution nearby.
And poor people have lived here prior to the shipyards being built and we'll be here until they march us out at gunpoint.
@Jim Jones If you dig a little deeper, I suspect you'll find that the Florida condos were forced to build off-street parking. Which, of course, limits density.
Can you find a real example of gentrification without density limits causing a net exodus of the poor?
Barrio Logan has been a dumping ground for things other communities wouldn't tolerate: pollution, industry, emergency homeless shelter, metal plating shops, car repair shops, gas storage facilities, etc. The plan would help mitigate this over time since all businesses within the confines of the plan are grandfathered in. Residents have been here before the shipyards and we ain't going anywhere.
It's ironic when people in a free country want the government to decide where they are allowed to live.
Any polling data on this you are aware of?
My guess they are trailing in the polls but can't find any data
@Mark Giffin There's no public polling that I'm aware of. I'd be curious to see polling not just on for/against, but of general awareness of the issue and its presence on the ballot. I imagine it's not something many people know about in the first place.
We have supporters and donors across the political spectrum throughout the community, and their interests don't guide our coverage. Our CEO Scott Lewis would be happy to address any specific concerns you have: firstname.lastname@example.org
@JoelCHoffmann thanks mang
I'm disappointed that the fact check on Asthma in Barrio Logan was linked in this article. That was a very weak fact check. There are a few things wrong with it, including the fact that 92113 is equated to Barrio Logan, when Barrio Logan makes up less than half of the 92113 zip code. VOSD's own graph in the article shows that 92114 had higher rates of asthma ER visits than 92113. The two reasons that the person that was fact checked speculated as the cause of 92113's high asthma ER visits rates were industrial activity, and the freeway that bisects the zip code, of which 92114 has neither despite their higher rates.
Chris Wahl is a shill for the industry that refuses to acknowledge that they are polluting my fellow residents. He's been lying throughout the entire process. His company, Southwest Strategies, hired the signature gatherers that were told, by him, to lie to get registered voters to sign the petition (as covered by Scott Lewis here at VofSD). SS is also the company that gathered sigs on behalf of Wal-Mart and then blackmailed the city council to withdraw their big box ordinance. Wahl and his SS are the shadiest lobbyists in town.
Please help my fellow Barrio Logan residents (and, in turn, other SD communities that may have to fight corporations that don't like their community plans) and vote YES on Props B and C. It's the right thing to do.
With all due respect bill I disagree... Their council representative Alvarez negotiated the the plan and I support him and the plan....so I guess our votes canceled each other out.
@Desde la Logan
But you're potentially building new homes next to the freeway...which is still unhealthful. Right?
The 1978 plan already allows that and nothing is dropping developers as is. Other than them not wanting to build here. The plan the shipyards pushed (Alternative 2) allowed for that as well. So for them to say this is a bad plan is false. The main difference between what were competing plans is the buffer zone and the conditional use permits that will be required if existing businesses within the zone want to expand by more than 20%.
It is disingenuous of maritime industry to claim more residents will be polluted if new housing is created when their plan also called for new housing and the existing plan allows for it as well.
@Desde la Logan Chris Wall notwithstanding and despite your heartfelt plea, I voted “no” for several reasons:
1. The scheme adds housing to a location that will be a continuing health problem regardless of which plan is adopted. I don’t think that makes sense.
2. If this plan is adopted it will put a lot of pressure on businesses that support the shipbuilders, and some will close or move.
2. Our shipbuilding industry, the last remaining in California, is an important source of jobs and helps ensure we will remain a “Navy” town. We need a diversified economic base, and I want to support that.
Barrio Logan is not the only area in the city where residents have a less than ideal environment and appear to be stuck with it. Check, e.g., Loma Portal and Ocean Beach as the airliners roar overhead 16 hours a day.
1. Yet you are ok with housing right next door to industrial businesses? THAT doesn't make sense.
2. There is no pressure for them to move. All businesses there are grandfathered in and they can expand up to 20% without a conditional use permit.
3) The shipyards are going nowhere. The Navy is going nowhere. The plan keeps the shipyards where they are with no changes to their operations. Housing will not be built by or next to them. New housing can only be built in the area north of Cesar Chavez which is blocks from the shipyards. Not next door like the liars are claiming.
You bought their lies like they knew people like you would. Shame on you for allowing that to happen.
Hmm, not sure where you're getting that impression. We're pretty upfront about who backs us: http://voiceofsandiego.org/about-us/
My tongue was firmly in cheek