This is our last chance to speak out!
The time and location of the meeting is difficult for working people so, if you cannot attend, please write a letter or email and send to Chair Bill Horn bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov and LAFCO member Dianne Jacob dianne.jacob@sdcounty.ca.gov .
Please attend the October 5, 2015 LAFCO hearing at 9 am in Room 310, County Administration Center, 1600 Pacific Highway, San Diego and oppose the Annexation of Oak Creek.
ENU's letter of concerns and opposition to the project is here ENU Letter to LAFCO opposing Oak Creek annexation.
In addition, the County staff still have concerns. County July 10, 2015 letter to LAFCO.
The Updated staff report is here Final LAFCO staff report
The city of Escondido's request is still not in alignment with the LAFCO staff or County staff positions. The project still needs to be revised to be supportable. We are calling on the LAFCO commission to deny the project as not meeting essential LAFCO goals.
In order to do the development, land currently in the County, must be annexed or transferred to the city of Escondido. The Oak Creek annexation is not orderly, is not logical, confuses local jurisdictions, and converts prime agricultural lands and open space into development of houses.
One look at the proposed annexation maps tells the story pretty clearly. Map of Proposed Annexation Currently there are no ‘islands’ in this region. If the annexation is approved, there will be two jurisdictional ‘islands’ where none exist now.
In addition, the County staff still have concerns. County July 10, 2015 letter to LAFCO.
The Updated staff report is here Final LAFCO staff report
The city of Escondido's request is still not in alignment with the LAFCO staff or County staff positions. The project still needs to be revised to be supportable. We are calling on the LAFCO commission to deny the project as not meeting essential LAFCO goals.
This project as proposed does not meet basic LAFCO goals, especially that any boundary changes should:
· Encourage orderly growth
· Promote logical and efficient public services for cities and special districts
· Streamline governmental structure
· Discourage premature conversion of prime agricultural and open space lands to urban uses.
In order to do the development, land currently in the County, must be annexed or transferred to the city of Escondido. The Oak Creek annexation is not orderly, is not logical, confuses local jurisdictions, and converts prime agricultural lands and open space into development of houses.
One look at the proposed annexation maps tells the story pretty clearly. Map of Proposed Annexation Currently there are no ‘islands’ in this region. If the annexation is approved, there will be two jurisdictional ‘islands’ where none exist now.
Further, it will remove part of Felicita Park to accommodate flood control easements for the development and the developer failed to provide city parklands in accordance with the city of Escondido requirements. This will leave a smaller Felicita Park being used by hundreds more residents. The County staff has raised consistent issues with the project related to the Park and transportation and they have not, so far, been resolved.
ENU is strongly opposed to this project. It has too high a density for the area, will cut down or encroach on 200 oak trees (including 100 with ‘protected’ status), increase runoff into two branches of Felicita Creek, has an unprecedented zero-foot minimum buffer between natural resources and development, and wall-off the neighborhood with a high wall around the project.
There are more reasonable alternatives. In the spirit of compromise, ENU proposed a compromise alternative Reduced Density, Reduce impact alternative and we ask, again, that it seriously be considered. Until New Urban West is will to engage in real dialog about a more reasonable alternative and sensible mitigation measures, we must continue to oppose this project.
There are more reasonable alternatives. In the spirit of compromise, ENU proposed a compromise alternative Reduced Density, Reduce impact alternative and we ask, again, that it seriously be considered. Until New Urban West is will to engage in real dialog about a more reasonable alternative and sensible mitigation measures, we must continue to oppose this project.
Once developed, negative impacts to the creek, the park, the riparian forest, and the neighborhood can never be reversed. In fact, once developed, the moniker Oak Creek will just be a memory of what used to be there.
LAFCO is supposed to be our defense against these kinds of city ‘land grabs’ merely to intensify development. LAFCO is explicitly supposed to prevent the creation of ‘islands’ of jurisdictions.
We hope that residents who live in the Monticello neighborhood are paying attention. If this passes, they will now be an island in the city—making them a sitting duck for future annexation.
Once this mistake is made, it cannot be undone. We are strongly urging the LAFCO Commissioners to deny the annexation of Oak Creek and maintain the integrity of our neighborhood, our creek, and our Park.
Please attend the October 5, 2015 LAFCO hearing at 9 am in Room 310, County Administration Center, 1600 Pacific Highway, San Diego and oppose the Annexation of Oak Creek.
There are more reasonable alternatives. In the spirit of compromise, ENU proposed a compromise alternative Reduced Density, Reduce impact alternative and we ask, again, that it seriously be considered. Until any dialog occurs about a more reasonable alternative and sensible mitigation measures, we must continue to oppose this project.
There are more reasonable alternatives. In the spirit of compromise, ENU proposed a compromise alternative Reduced Density, Reduce impact alternative and we ask, again, that it seriously be considered. Until any dialog occurs about a more reasonable alternative and sensible mitigation measures, we must continue to oppose this project.
No comments:
Post a Comment