Friday, October 06, 2006

Park Development a step closer (Press-Enterprise 100406) Seccombe lake: a proposal for a land exchange needs only state officials approval

Park development a step closer

SECCOMBE LAKE: A proposal for a land exchange needs only state officials' approval.

12:32 AM PDT on Wednesday, October 4, 2006

By CHRIS RICHARD
The Press-Enterprise

Seccombe Swap

San Bernardino officials have cleared a hurdle in their bid to develop a portion of Seccombe Lake Park.

Gated residential community on 12.5 acres

More than 50 single-family homes

As many as 25 condominiums

A plan to transform the northern shore of Seccombe Lake into a gated residential development has won preliminary state approval, San Bernardino officials and the local state assemblyman said Tuesday.

Gov. Schwarzenegger signed special legislation Saturday that approves a 12.5-acre land swap. San Bernardino officials already have an 8.4-acre parcel ready to trade.

State parks officials would still need to sign off on the final land exchange. City Manager Fred Wilson predicted he could complete the exchange and be ready to seek a developer within a year.

The governor's conceptual approval marks a crucial step in an 18-month campaign by state Assemblyman Joe Baca Jr., D-Rialto.

"One of the problems along the way was that (other legislators) thought we were just going to give this land away to developers," Baca said. "In fact, this is good for the district. It's good for the city."

Baca first introduced the legislation in February 2005. Last month, it bogged down in the state Senate Appropriations Committee, and city officials resigned themselves to another year of lobbying.

But Baca arranged a last-minute meeting to explain the bill to Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, the committee chairman. Baca said he got Assembly Bill 1457 out of committee and to the governor half an hour before the end of the legislative session.

The need for state approval dates to 1987, when the state gave the city the park and $8 million to clean out its lake, install a concession stand and make other improvements. In exchange, San Bernardino leaders promised to keep the 44-acre park for public recreation, unless the Legislature permitted some other use.

Since then, city officials say the park has become a magnet for homeless people and crime.

They say the solution is to enclose the entire 44 acres with a fence, and to build a gated residential development on land currently occupied by baseball fields. The ball fields would be relocated to a city-owned 8.4-acre parcel at East Seventh Street and Waterman Avenue.

With more people living near the lake, and with private security to keep the neighborhood safe, the atmosphere in and around the park will improve, Mayor Pat Morris said.

He stressed that the land swap does not discriminate against the homeless. He said the Police Department recently assigned an officer to help homeless people, and both the city and local charitable organizations maintain facilities to assist them.

"This park is not one of those centers," Morris said. "To be enjoyed by families, it must be a safe place."

Reach Chris Richard at 909-806-3076 or crichard@PE.com


BS Ranch Perspective:

It is going to be weird to have private property where it was once a piece of public land, especially land that is so devastated by the homeless, they are hidden in that property like the tick in a dog's coat! Even with one officer assigned down there is a lot of problems dealing with the homeless, a lot of them are mentally incapable of sustaining the idea that they must leave an area that they have been at for so many years. They were only slid away for a week or so at a time, now they are being moved permanently it is going to be devastating to some, but to others they will look to it as an opportunity to move on to a better park or better part of the park.

Still they have to figure something out just closing part of the park and building private homes will leave the homeless problem for the people that are purchasing into the new buildings or community inside the park!! I would not want to live there! I don't think that I would want to subject my wife to that kind of a place! would you?

BSRanch

No comments: