Schwarzenegger signs bill boosting NFL stadium plans in San Gabriel Valley
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today signed a bill to help speed up construction of an NFL stadium in the San Gabriel Valley.
The legislation exempts the proposed 75,000-seat stadium from state environmental laws and is intended to hasten the planning process. The $800-million project by developer Ed Roski Jr. is planned near the junction of the 57 and 60 freeways.
“This is the best kind of action state government can create: action that cuts red tape, generates jobs, is environmentally friendly and brings a continued economic boost to California,” Schwarzenegger said. “This legislation allows us to move forward with the construction of the nation’s greenest football stadium and create thousands of jobs.”
Construction of the 3-million-square-foot stadium complex is estimated to create more than 18,000 jobs, according to a statement on the governor’s website.
The complex will include an orthopedic hospital, a movie and live performance theater, and office and retail space. But even in the wake of the bill signing, the stadium faces obstacles. It remains unclear whether such a large project could get construction loans amid the current credit crunch.
This issue has stalled several other mega-projects in Southern California, including the Frank Gehry-designed Grand Avenue development in downtown Los Angeles.
-- Raja Abdulrahim
Photo: A rendering of the City of Industry site, which would contain retail and office space, practice fields and banquet facilities. Credit: Mike Amaya / Meis Architects
More breaking news in L.A. Now:
Dozens of gang members arrested in South L.A. sweep
Medical marijuana poll: Most L.A. voters support dispensaries
AEG president says Trutanich tried to 'bully' company on Jackson costs
Local, state and federal agencies conduct Los Angeles County gang sweep
Roman Polanski might be open to extradition, attorney says
Community meetings to focus on wildfire protection plan for Santa Monica Mountains
EDITOR'S PICKS:
Finally we hear a good news in these sad days.
I wish the project goes forward soon. So many people can use the jobs that bring food and regain pride.
Negative people will always be nagative - just ignore them. Losers always see obstacles.
The unemployment rate is too high. Those who oppose the Stadium have never shown one solution to the situation nor a bit of care.
Something positive is happening, what a great news today.
Posted by: Rob | October 22, 2009 at 01:15 PM
Ed Roski Jr. should buy the Rams and bring them back to Los Angeles.
Posted by: Warren | October 22, 2009 at 01:16 PM
Could we hear from an environmental advocate's perspective on the Governor's assessment that the project is "environmentally-friendly"?
Posted by: Lance | October 22, 2009 at 01:17 PM
Despite Schwarzenegger's happy talk these are the kind of concessions to corporate and real estate interests that are so repugnant to the people of California. It is a part of our broken government that has been co-opted. And "cutting red tape" is a rather glib way to describe this giveaway. The City of Industry can be properly described as a fiefdom... "a political structure that more closely resembles an alliance of deeply rooted families than a traditional municipality" as an Oct. 20th LA Times article put it. What about the residents of the San Gabriel Valley? I'm from Rowland Heights originally, and the 60 fwy is a lifeline to get to LA or the Inland Empire, and putting a stadium at the 60 and 57 would pretty much jam up the freeway completely, if it isn't already. "Thousands of jobs" are not a big enough carrot to dangle in front of citizens when they find out they won't be able to get to or from these make-believe jobs; they'll be sitting in traffic along with the rest of the make-believe fans of the crappy team whatever franchise is going to field.
Posted by: Patrick | October 22, 2009 at 01:19 PM
Figgins, don't ask such an uncomfortable question.
The stadium will be environmentally friendly because Arnold says so, and the way he's holding that football in the picture must mean he's sincere about it.
Posted by: Matt | October 22, 2009 at 01:19 PM
Exempting CA environmental laws sound like such a bad idea and yet they're claiming that it will be "Environmentally Friendly"?? If it were... why ask for an exemption from the law? I know California is in a bad place right now but do we have to stupe so low as to bypass laws to get money??
Posted by: McK | October 22, 2009 at 01:21 PM
The coverage over what exactly is being signed is atrocious. The LA Times has really dropped the ball and deserves a faster death than the one it is suffering right now!
I thought the exemption was a very minor one that had to deal with a technicality with state regulations (and maybe a greedy overreaching homeowners association). To say that the stadium is exempt from all (any) environmental laws is silly.
If you'd rather have the site be turned into warehouses with big trucks handling dangerous chemicals going in and out 24/7 (which did have CEQA/EIR approval) instead of a stadium (on a Metrolink line) with maybe 10 events a year as a neighbor, you should have your head examined.
Posted by: Teaser38 | October 22, 2009 at 01:23 PM
support HR 1207
Posted by: Charlie Peters | October 22, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Why is the Staduim given free reign and Swartzy stopped the highway from going to Corona from San Juan Capistrano?
Some kind of Environmentalist Arnie is....OH wait he's not. I had visions of grandure! Los Angeles HAD 2 football teams at one time WHY DID THEY LEAVE? Los Angeles never wanted to upgrade any stadium for those teams, why does another city outside of Los Angeles have to build something NEW, AND WITHOUT AN EIR THERE CAN BE ALL KINDS OF TROUBLE. The burden on local streets will in turn mean more maintenance, who will pay for that? San Gabrielenos? Los Angeles Tax payers? I know add an extra tax on the local business owners to keep the roads from falling apart this will encourage new business to open up shop!
This means that pollution from all the traffic a NFL Team can bring means nothing, the impact of the increased traffic means nothing, the oil in the parking lot means nothing, the trash left in the parking lot means nothing. These few things end up in the storm drains and go right out into our local oceans to cause the beaches to close due to increased pollution levels.. Surfers can't surf, Fish can't breathe, Birds end up eating trash, all in all the beaches will have to have more Voulenteer Clean Up Days. Enjoy life in Southern Kal-E-forn-ia because the environment for the future means nothing to our Governor.
Posted by: farbie | October 22, 2009 at 01:26 PM
Since when does having a football stadium become more important than the health and quality of our lifestyle? The jobs to be created will be; minimum wage and part time with no health benefits. This is the equivalent to opening 10 McDonald's restaurants in the same space. Except they don't have to comply with our environmental standards of air-pollution control, waste removal, traffic, etc...
Posted by: Kimbo | October 22, 2009 at 01:30 PM
1) This project had an EIR written and adopted for it, with tons of mitigations that are required to build it. The environment is not being ignored.
2) "...do we even have the money to sign a football team right now?" Who is this "we" you are talking about. Taxpayers won't be building this stadium or buying a team.
3) "...out in the boonies...?" There is life east of the 605 - and of a lot of it. This stadium would be central to ALL of Southern California, not just LA. There aren't any sites that are plausible (physically or politically) near downtown LA (the NFL has rejected the Colosseum numerous times). Plus there is a metrolink station less than a mile from the proposed stadium.
Posted by: mike d | October 22, 2009 at 01:34 PM
Do us proud Mr. Roski...
Posted by: Angel | October 22, 2009 at 01:34 PM
Does anyone want the Raiders or Rams to possibly return to LA?
Posted by: ernesto | October 22, 2009 at 01:43 PM
wonderful just add to the crazy traffic of the 57/60 interchange on game days. not okay.
Posted by: Melanie | October 22, 2009 at 01:44 PM
It's environmentally friendly to skip the environmental review?
Nice.
Posted by: Jonathan | October 22, 2009 at 01:51 PM
Aside from my worries about the traffic conditions, this is a great venture. It's about time we have some investments made to bring a football team to LA. I mean, come on, WE'RE IN LOS ANGELES!!! Think of all the tax revenue that would be generated. Screw the animals, they do nothing for us in that particular area but just take up space and give activists something to bitch about... and I highly doubt there is toxic waste, Chuckerson...
YES TO STADIUM IN LA!! WE NEED MORE JOBS AND MORE REVENUE!!!
Posted by: MP | October 22, 2009 at 02:02 PM
Instead of building a stadium in the outskirts of L.A. we should demolish the Coliseum (or Hollywood Park) and build something new there. If you’re going to bypass California environment laws; why not do it somewhere where there’s already a trashy parking lot with seagull droppings.
Posted by: BringNFLBack | October 22, 2009 at 02:05 PM
About time. I don't care how many squirrels, birds or trees get cut down. The biggest problem facing this great nation is it's second largest city not having a football team. Adrian Peterson, time to shop for an LA mansion. Can't wait for kick off!
Posted by: hippy hater | October 22, 2009 at 02:10 PM
NO NFL STADIUM IN LA!!!!!!!
We already have the Coliseum and Rose Bowl. This is just another waste of money, not to mention the irony in an environmental exception. NO, NO, NO! I am strickly against this. Please do not let this happen!!!!!
Posted by: Peter Venti | October 22, 2009 at 02:13 PM
If LA is going to get a football team, why not have it located in the city of Los Angeles? There is plenty of land available in the San Fernando Valley. Otherwise don't call them by the name of Los Angeles. This reminds me of the Los Angeles Angeles of Anaheim.
Posted by: Mike Hawk | October 22, 2009 at 02:30 PM
I personally don't think we need the Raiders back as some of you have commented. ALL Raiders fans are nothing but lowlife gang banging scumbags that destroy property, and cause nothing but trouble!!
Posted by: William | October 22, 2009 at 02:31 PM
THAT IS THE BEST NEW OF THE WEEK. NOW WE CAN GET PEOPLE GO BACK TO WORK, KEEP THE ECONOMY MOVING FORWARD, MORE INCOME MONEY FOR THE CITIES AND STATES TO KEEP THEM OPERATING, AND LESS PROTESTING
Posted by: LEXUSRY | October 22, 2009 at 02:32 PM
Listen people, you guys should really read the facts before commenting on this proposed stadium. THE FACT is they already completed several environmental reports. The city of Walnut is trying to delay and in fact, stop it, by contesting the environmental reports.
The City of Walnut were using tactics to stop the building of this stadium at all costs, NOT TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT!!!!!!
Thankfully the state saw what was happening, and streamlined the process. The builders of this stadium have jumped through hoop after hoop, and its good to see they finally have a clear path to build this thing.
Posted by: Mike | October 22, 2009 at 02:46 PM
This is awful!
Why are we promoting sprawl and traffic? A stadium should be in the urban center or it shouldn't exist. There is no way that a significant number of fans could travel to the 57 and 60 without cars. Put the stadium by Union Station or Central LA off of the Metro, and we can promote an NFL team without ruining the traffic system.
No Stadium out of the City Center!
Posted by: Frank | October 22, 2009 at 02:51 PM
it would be much better if people would actually do some research before commenting.
EIR's were done on the property as it was scheduled to be an industrial site. the Environment is not being ignored. the only reason there was to be a new EIR was because 8 homeowners in walnut were trying to extort money from the developer and wanted him to build a domed stadium to mitigate noise and light pollution on game days. To show how dumb these 8 people were, they were on a mission to also mitigate blimp noise! you know, those noisy blimps that clog our sky's.
Melissa, in regards to the traffic issue, get over it. you can deal with traffic 8 times a year. Also, the new HSR station will be a 1/4 mile from the stadium.
Posted by: D | October 22, 2009 at 03:09 PM