Anheuser-Busch Bay

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana

San Diego ... The current debate about Anheuser-Busch's expansion plans for SeaWorld is nothing new. San Diegans have a long history of fighting to protect our coastal resources, preserve public access along the shoreline, control high-rise development in the coastal zone and limit private leases on public parkland in Mission Bay.

For example, in 1972 San Diego voters approved a 30-foot height limit in the coastal zone, which included Mission Bay Park. The public believed that coastal views are a valuable asset and did not want the coast to become awash in high-rise development.

In 1987, the citizens voted overwhelmingly to further protect public parkland in Mission Bay by limiting to 25 percent the amount of parkland that could be leased for private uses. This vote was preceded in large part by the failure of elected officials and government agencies to protect Mission Bay Park from over-commercialization.

In 1994, the current Mission Bay Park Master Plan (Plan) was adopted by the San Diego City Council and approved by the California Coastal Commission. The Plan recognized that Mission Bay Park's land and water resources are limited and cautioned against the "excessive commercialization of its resources." It also recognized the need for some expansion of the 404 acres of commercial leases, but not to the detriment of the public use of the land, nor beyond a "practical maximum of 419 acres."

But despite all these measures, the amount of privately leased acreage on our public parkland continues to grow, and today over 465 acres of Mission Bay Park is leased to private interests, with SeaWorld being the single largest commercial lessee. It wasn't always that way, however.

In 1964, when SeaWorld opened its original "ocean aquarium park" the lease was approximately 18 acres. By 1985, SeaWorld had expanded into 148 acres of public parkland.

In 1989, Anheuser-Busch bought SeaWorld and by 1998 had acquired an additional 23.5 acres, bringing its total leased land to over 170 acres. Anheuser-Busch also funded a $1.2 million ballot initiative in 1998 in order to exempt its entire leasehold from the voter approved 1972 coastal height limit. Voters were told that the exemption was necessary to help SeaWorld protect ocean wildlife, and that there were no plans to build a roller coaster. The measure passed by a narrow margin (50.7 to 49.3 percent).

No one disputes that SeaWorld is a valued community asset for the City of San Diego and should be allowed to make reasonable improvements to remain a viable tourist attraction. However, Anheuser-Busch should not be permitted to turn SeaWorld into an overly thematic amusement park. The current master plan runs afoul of SeaWorld's original purpose and mission of marine education and conservation for ocean wildlife.

This loss of public parkland, increased commercialization, and intensification of noise, traffic and pollution are among the many concerns the public has raised about SeaWorld's proposed master plan.

Anheuser-Busch's high intensity, high-rise, and high bulk and scale development proposal will also impair existing views, as well as the quiet enjoyment of public parklands in areas adjacent to SeaWorld, such as South Shores and Fiesta Island.

Last week, the California Coastal Commission staff recommended modifications to Anheuser-Busch's expansion plans to help address the negative environmental impacts. These include:

Locating the 95-foot tall "thrill ride" back from the coastline to allow development of an open, free, public walkway around the shoreline

Completing traffic studies to determine what improvements are needed to relieve congestion, and identifying funding for these improvements before generating even more traffic

Requiring a five-year monitoring program to evaluate the potential adverse effects from the fireworks

Providing environmental review and public hearings for each new, unidentified project in the second phase of expansion

Anheuser-Busch's claims that these requirements are a "devastating blow to business" and akin to a "building moratorium." But no one is trying to prevent Anheuser-Busch from making necessary upgrades and improvements to SeaWorld. In reality, the Coastal Commission staff is merely carrying out the will of the voters and ensuring the integrity of the Mission Bay Park Master Plan.

While I disagree with allowing giant roller coaster type rides in our public parkland, I do agree with the majority of the Coastal Commission's staff recommendations. The public should support these reasonable safeguards and encourage the Coastal Commissioners to adopt only those proposals which protect and preserve our public views, public access and public parkland. Otherwise, Mission Bay Park may one day become Anheuser-Busch Bay.

Please call (619) 236-6616, send a fax (619) 236-7329, e-mail: donnafrye@sandiego.gov , or write to my office at 202 C Street, M.S. 10A, San Diego, 92101 with comments, questions or concerns. I am here to serve you and look forward to hearing from you.