Carson Project Doesn’t Have Time on Its Side

Even though the NFL seems to have a flexible timeline when it comes to bringing a franchise back to Los Angeles, at least one of the four competing sites does not.

The developer who controls the 157-acre Carson site said Tuesday his group needs to weigh whether to stay in the stadium derby if the NFL isn’t ready to make a decision on a site in the next five months.

NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue recently told The Times that the league intends to choose a site in the L.A. area in 2005, but there’s a chance the decision won’t be made by May.

The league is considering stadium concepts at the Coliseum, Rose Bowl, Anaheim and Carson.

“It’s disheartening to hear that the date in May might be moved back,� developer Steve Hopkins said. “A change in the date affects us more than any of the other sites. If it’s a moving target, that’s not good for us because we have an alternative plan.�

Hopkins said he has met with league officials three times since October and each time received assurances the league would be ready to make a decision when team owners convene for their annual May meeting. So he was surprised to learn of the apparent softening of the schedule.

Not only would Carson be hard-pressed to have a stadium ready for a team to play in 2008, Hopkins said, but “if that decision moves out from May, you can probably forget about 2009.�

Neil Glat, an NFL executive helping analyze the L.A.-area stadium options, said the league’s position has been consistent in that “we’re going to get the work done to put the ownership in a position to make a decision by May.� Whether that decision will be made then is up to the team owners.

“We set up a timetable that tried to put some discipline to the process,� Glat said. “We knew it wasn’t going to be one size fits all, but we’re trying to work with all the groups involved so we’re in position to present it to ownership in May.�

Glat later said: “We’re not going to make the most expedient decision, what we’re saying is we’re going to make the right decision.�

Hopkins consistently has made it clear he will keep an open mind about the NFL but intends to move forward on his concept to develop a mall on the Carson site, a toxic landfill that has been vacant since the late 1960s. He is moving forward on an environmental-impact report that will focus on four mixed-use scenarios for the land, two with a stadium and two without. He asked the league to pay a $150,000 prorated portion of the environmental-impact report to cover the expense of including a proposed stadium in the study. The league declined.

“The bottom line is the league wants site control,� Hopkins said. “People have said to me, ‘They’re just trying to wait for us not to close.’ But that ain’t gonna happen -- we’re going to close.�

Carson officials have not submitted a stadium proposal to the league but had planned to do so in January. Hopkins said he still expected one will be submitted.

The Carson site is especially complicated because of the potential expense of cleaning the land and making it suitable for development. The environmental-impact report won’t be finished until September, Hopkins said.

The Coliseum and Anaheim already have certified reports, and Rose Bowl officials are striving to have theirs ready by May.

Sources familiar with the league’s position on the competing sites say the Coliseum and Anaheim are the leading candidates, followed by the Rose Bowl, then Carson.

Hopkins said he plans to get together with Carson city officials within a week to discuss the future of their relationship with the NFL.

“We’ve got to get together,� he said, “and figure out, what does this mean for us?�