SIERRA CLUB'S CALIFORNIA COASTWATCHER MARCH 2000 "WATSONVILLE HIGH SCHOOL FLUNKS TEST BUT IS PASSED ANYWAY"

by Mark Massara
Sierra Club Coastal Program Attorney
mark.massara@sierraclub.org

Several hundred people attended the Commission meeting on Thursday, March 16 to hear deliberations regarding a proposal to build a new high school in the rural community of Watsonville, which lies in the County of Santa Cruz near the Santa Cruz-Monterey County line.

The project was one of the most difficult and contentious to come before the Commission in many years. The site chosen by the City is an extremely sensitive wetlands and strawberry farm, located west of Highway #1 and surrounded by adjacent farms, environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and the Struve and Hanson sloughs.

The project is unique inasmuch as the Department of Fish & Game ("DFG"), the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USF&W) and Coastal Commission staff all agreed that the site is 100% ESHA. It consists of wetlands, upland wetland habitat and a strawberry farm which serves as a wildlife corridor between the two sloughs.

That the environment is significant is beyond question. The Watsonville Local Coastal Plan (LCP) designates the Struve Slough as the most important and significant coastal resource in the City. Dr. Robert Curry, a wetlands scientist, calls the Watsonville slough system the most important fresh water wetland system in California.

For at least eight years Coastal staff, DFG and USF&W have repeatedly instructed the City to build the school elsewhere. Numerous alternative, better suited sites exist throughout downtown Watsonville, but the City has refused to consider those sites because it wants to reserve undeveloped property for future commercial and housing construction.

The school would be primarily located on the strawberry farm, but would encroach onto wetlands on both the east (Struve Slough) and the west (Hanson Slough). The strawberry farm is a profitable farm employing 80 workers and whose owner had refused to sell to the school district.

Of critical concern was the growth and sprawal inducing affects of allowing a 2400-student high school into an area composed almost completely of agricultural operations and ESHA wetlands.

Another concern was the City's intent to abolish the urban rural boundary line for the community, which previously had been Highway #1. The school was an effort by the City to introduce sprawl into the outlying, rural and agriculturally zoned area west of the highway.

Coastal staff recommended approval of the school but also urged many changes. Among other things, staff sought to reconfigure the school across more of the farm in order to reduce encroachments onto the wetlands.

The City objected to any changes to it's proposal, setting the stage for a vigorous debate before the Commission.

At the outset was apparent that if this project had been proposed anywhere but Watsonville it would not have seen the light of day. A number of unfortunate factors contributed to the project's posture. First was the City's steadfast refusal to consider feasible and available alternative sites closer to town. Second was the fact that the City's site was 100% ESHA, raising the question of just where you build a gigantic high school on 100% ESHA?

The single most influential factor in deliberating the school, however, was the intense support it received from local Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Santa Cruz-Monterey). Keeley spent weeks and hundreds of hours lobbying the project, and sat through the Commission's entire 10 hour deliberation of the matter. Keeley was previously been known and respected for being a coastal champion, a Vote the Coast endorsement winner, and a strong proponent of environmental protection on the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Other constraints surfaced, further complicating the deliberations. Among them were issues related to aviation safety, mitigation measures related to wetlands impacts, and ESHA impacts related to grassed playing fields. The City also sought to convert the soils to 50% impervious parking lot and pavement.

The flight path of the Watsonville Airport lies directly above the proposed school site. In 1987 CalTrans Aviation Division found the site inappropriate for a school. Then in 1992, when the small craft airplane industry appeared to going extinct, CalTrans subsequently approved the site. Yet today CalTrans has lost all the supporting data for the approval.

Worse, the City's proposed school is nearly double the footprint of the approved CalTrans site.

More recently there has been a dramatic increase in operations at the airport. There are now 10 jets at the airport, fuel sales have increased 100% and dozens of new hangers have been constructed. The runway will soon be expanded by 800-ft.

Due to the "fence sitter" nature of the school being below the flight path, the City refused to seek a new aviation evaluation because everyone suspects the new school could not safely coexist with the airport. Staff and Sierra Club urged the Commission to require a new aviation analysis.

Similarly, the City refused to consider alternative sites, and even built a Target shopping center on one of the better suited alternatives.

Then a wetlands scientist Curry informed the Commission of his research demonstrating that grass playing fields pollute wetlands worse than parking lots. The implications of such information are profound. Dr. Curry's research shows that parking lots and turf grass fields are equally impervious- meaning that both cause water to runoff. That turf is impervious may sound contrary to many, but if you have ever peeled back a sod lawn, even years after installation, you will see that the turf and soils are still completely hardpacked and undegraded.

Curry's point is that the pesticide and fertilized runoff from turf grass playing fields is more degrading to wetlands than is parking lot runoff. Sierra Club urged the Commission to require more research into Curry's proposition, to determine whether alternative grasses are better suited to protecting wetlands, and to research the feasibility of moving playing fields offsite.

Similarly the proposed high school contains a football stadium that will not be lighted, as night lights cause catastrophic impacts to wetlands habitat and wildlife. Sierra Club argued that it is unfair to expect Watsonville to be the only high school in California that is deprived of traditional Friday night football games, and that the issue should be resolved prior to the project being considered further.

As mitigation for destroying the strawberry farm and wetlands the City provided the Commission with a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) wherein they sought to promise not to develop any further projects west of Highway #1. Sierra Club representatives conferred with Assemblyman Keeley (27th Assembly District) and City representatives for dozens of hours on the MOU. Sierra Club sought to

mitigate the impacts through acquisition of two adjacent agricultural parcels, the Tai property and a cattle feed lot ranch. The purpose is to prevent sprawal through concrete acquisition of conservation easements and elimination of the feed lot nuisance rather than just paper promises regarding future growth inducements.

Assemblyman Keeley led the City in it's attempt to fill the wetlands and build the school. The unusual contribution of Keeley made the deliberations extremely difficult and breathed life into an otherwise unacceptable proposal. Keeley sincerely believes that he can put into place permanent measures that will prevent future sprawal so long as the City can build the high school west of Hwy #1 first.

In the end, after hundreds of speakers and ten hours of deliberations, the Commission approved the project with near unanimity. Only Commissioner Paula Daniels objected (Commissioner Estolano was absent). Other Commissioners "hoped" Assemblyman Keeley could insure for both a school on top of a healthy wetland, something God can't even accomplish.

Keeley's intense involvement may signal a new dangerous turn in coastal lobbying, where Democratic legislators are recruited by developers to twist the arms of Commissioners appointed by - ahem - Democratic legislators. Even if such strategies are not intended, the appearance of success at Watsonville will likely set in motion efforts by developers of otherwise unacceptable projects to recruit legislators. It is always more difficult to say no to your allies than your enemies.

Although the Commission did require the project be reconfigured, they acquiesced to the City's demand that agricultural buffers surrounding the school be reduced from 200-ft to 50-ft, insuring children suffer even greater exposure to chemicals and pesticides.

It remains unclear whether the school will ever be built. Funding problems, severe traffic constraints, and unstable soils threaten to unravel the project. A new CalTrans aviation study is also required, as is a new approval from state architects.

All in all, a sad day for protection of our last remaining coastal wetlands.

Final Note: Next month's April meeting, in Long Beach, is going to be packed with controversial projects, including proposals for housing at Bolsa Chica wetlands and fill of wetlands in Huntington Beach, destruction of habitat at Crystal Cove by the Irvine Company, and the long running privileged parking program in Santa Monica. We'll see you there!

Love Your Coast, CoastWatcher can be delivered free to any email address. For subscription information, visit www.sierraclub.org; go to the "take action" box; go to the "activist news" box; go to the "regional news" box; and there you will find the complete CoastWatcher inventory and subscription information.