Save the Trees or Save the Stadium?
An Alameda County judge will issue a ruling on the stadium/oaks ordeal by Monday. Three plaintiffs, including the city of Berkeley, have filed a request for a preliminary injunction on construction of the stadium renovations and additions. The plaintiffs argue that the plans could not possibly be seismically safe with the proposed buildings so close to the fault line. The city, combined with the Panoramic Hill Association, suggest that the stadium be strengthened first before any additions are made. Campus officials answer that the state will not fund such measures and that the donor money used for the athletic center and stadium renovation will go toward making the stadium seismically safer in the next two years.
Why can’t we all get along? Both sides agree that the stadium is in a precarious situation and desperately needs some retrofitting and renovating. However, the addition of the “student athlete high performance center” or whatever the hell it’s called is not something the school really needs. Donor funds should be spent on something that will benefit the students as a whole and not just a small percentage of them. The campus does not need to expand further east. It does not need to add more traffic on Piedmont (just think of those horrid game days…times, like, a bajillion). And, hey, just for kicks let’s add a nine-hundred-space parking garage on top of that. The more the merrier, right?
Why can’t we have both the trees and a retrofitted stadium? It shouldn’t be this hard.
My Dad’s an industrial architect, he has to re-adjust the siting of buildings ALL THE TIME because of municipal zoning boards and planners.
I heard that we could also put the training building under Maxwell Field. Maxwell is right there next to the stadium. I read that we want to put parking at Maxwell, but like you say, the traffic on Piedmont already sucks. So why does Cal want to put 900 more cars a day on it.
I guess all I am saying is how about a little creative thinking here, just move the training building 100 yards, then the trees can stay, we get to have a training building next to the stadium and we can get on with life.
Comment by Gary G — January 25, 2007 @ 1:54 am
a better idea would to be to the training center next to the stadium, and the trees under maxwell field. f*ck the trees.
Comment by anon54 — January 25, 2007 @ 9:49 am
The idea that a local judge is now an expert on seismic safety and ecological issues, especially at the same time, is laughable. This case has no business in the court system. And, people, trees are a renewable resource. So plant a few trees somewhere else and call it a day. After all, forests purge themselves of old growth occasionally, even without the help of men. If the forests are smart enough to re-stock themselves, surely we are, too.
Regarding the benefits of student athlete high performance center, in the long run it would benefit the majority of Cal students. Successful athletic programs draw donations from alumni, which go to fund new buildings, programs, scholarships, etc. I bet even some Nobel Prize winners appreciate the athletic excellence now becoming a Cal tradition again. Without the performance center, Cal would likely lose coaches like Tedford, Braun and others because of the difficulty of bringing top quality student athletes to Cal. Why would a recruit choose the University of Nebraska over Cal? Surely not because of the climate or the ambience or the academic excellence. Reject the performance center and prepare yourself for a long spiral downwards in the performance of athletic teams, and the corresponding downturn in funding and all that goes with it.
Comment by DHammett — January 25, 2007 @ 10:37 am
So at what point did an Alameda County judge become an expert on matters seismic, architectural and ecological? Another example of our judiciary reaching too far. This issue does not belong in the court system.
And as far as the old growth trees are concerned, trees are a renewable resource. Forests occassionally regenerate themselves without the “help” of man. Surely we can find a place to plant a few more oaks to replace those that will have to go. They’ve had their time…let’s let some younger trees stand in the gap.
To say that the training center is not beneficial to the students is short-sighted. To begin, alumni upon whom the University relies for donations are proven to be more likely to donate to a University with successful athletic programs. These donations benefit not only the athletic department, but find their way into new buildings, programs and scholarships.
But without the training center, Cal stands to lose the high-quality coaches it worked so hard to find, to lose athletes to other programs with better facilities, to lose the good feeling that accompanies athletic success. I would venture to guess that even a Nobel Prize winner or two appreciates the athletic successes that have again come to Cal so recently.
Comment by DHammett — January 25, 2007 @ 11:00 am
LOL
Well said.
Comment by Glicky — January 25, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
the trees these people are so worried about aren’t even “old growth,” as they claim - they were planted in 1923!!
the university will plant 3 for every one they remove. also, these people are frikin’ retarded… the few trees that will be removed are a pittance compared to the huge number of trees around campus and the city and the whole goddamn bay area.
Comment by anon — January 25, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
I believe the tree huggers make the grass fell less valuable as a species. I do not see them hugging grass? Such racists there are.
Comment by yikes — January 25, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
I find it really alarming that people are buying the “inaccuracies” of the Save The Oaks people in what EXACTLY the University is doing.
I think I should point out that, according to the official University Documents about the development plan, the removal of the Oaks isn’t neccesarily tied to this Student Athlete High Performance deal.
The Oaks will also need to be removed to make room for some type of seismic structural retrofitting implements for the stadium (as you can tell I am not technically knowledgeable in this).
Regardless of the SAHPS, these Oaks will be coming down, or the stadium itself cannot continue to stand.
Comment by Eddy Crochetiere — January 26, 2007 @ 5:50 pm