|
Wednesday’s City Council meeting pretty much transpired as
expected, well, except that Mayor Sam Abed went off the rails more than usual.
Even the usually non-committal reporter for the San Diego UT noticed: “Mayor Sam Abed
thanked everyone in the chambers for their civility during the hearing.
However, he also strongly criticized local environmental lawyer Everett DeLano
for a letter he sent this week that Abed said was filled with untruths and was
an ‘embarrassment.’ ” http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/04/escondido-oak-creek-council-approved/
“Strongly criticized” is an understatement—Abed was rude, very
uncivil, and an embarrassment to the City.
The main item on the agenda was #10 OAK CREEK PROJECT
ANNEXATION, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, PRELIMINARY, MASTER AND PRECISE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PRE-ZONE, GRADING EXEMPTIONS, SPECIFIC ALIGNMENT PLAN AND
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. The project, already approved by the
Planning Commission, will build 65 homes on some 37.6 acres. One home per over
half an acre—that doesn’t sound too dense, a considerable decrease from what
the County’s or even the City’s General Plan would allow—as the developer, New
Urban West’s spokesman, Jason Han, and, later, Councilmen Ed Gallo, John
Masson, and Abed pointed out. But, considering that any home built in the
County would have to have a septic system, which would usually require at least
an acre, maybe not. To even build 65 homes would require a sewer system. These
proposed new “multi-generational” homes ranging from a mere 3,300 square feet
to 4,617 square feet, with four to six bedrooms, and corresponding number of
bathrooms will be built on lots of around 10,000 to 12,000 sq. feet. It will be
a gated community. It will build a public sidewalk along Felicita Road, and put
in a “traffic calming” traffic circle on Felicity Road. It will save the
seasonal Duck Pond, and allow public access to the pond—even install a bench to
view the pond. Sounds delightful.
But wait—the project will also remove some 238 mature trees,
including over 100 native Coastal Live Oaks. The developer has promised to
replace these with 400 native trees and 1500 seedlings. All well and good, but
a mature tree can nest many more birds than many immature trees. There will be
a disturbance to the bird populations.
There were, by my count, about as many speakers against the
development as for the development, but there were also about twice as many
supporters as opponents in the audience. Both sides made some good arguments.
Escondido Neighbors United (ENU) objected to the removal of mature oak trees,
the presence of toxic chemicals under a part of the development’s land caused
by a toxic plume that had originated from the Chatham Waste site. J. Harry
Jones sums up the history of this site well: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/sep/30/escondido-chatham-pbrothers-plume-toxic/2/?#article-copy
. ENU members argue that the state’s Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC) was much too optimistic in their assurances that the problem was not
significant. http://escondidoneighborsunited.blogspot.com/
. They also argue that the buffer zones between the project and the seasonal
creeks on the property was not consistent with Escondido’s General Plan, and
that the gated community would present a major barrier to wildlife. ENU
presented an alternate plan for a development, a non-gated project with 41
homes.
Those neighbors for the development cited their belief that this
development would slow down the traffic on Felicity. The sidewalk would make it
safer for their children. The development’s site had been allowed to become a
dumping ground and homeless camp, and the proponents were glad that would not
happen again. I found it curious that neither these neighbors, the Council, nor
the developer questioned why the owner of the land, Arie de Jong, was never
criticized for allowing his land to become so blighted. The neighbors favoring
the development really got to speak twice, since many had appeared in a video
presented by Han during his time before the Council. New Urban West does do an
excellent job of convincing the neighbors that their developments are just what
their neighborhood needs. Their development in Harmony Grove is a classic case
of their smarts in the public relations department. But, that’s another blog or
two, or three, or five.
Councilman Mike Morasco led the parade of praise for New Urban
West by the Council majority. He complemented those who had spoken on both
sides for being so civil, then proceeded to claim that the opponents had stated
as facts things that were not factual—without actually iterating what those
non-facts were. He could not understand why a bridge over a creek would be a
problem for wildlife.
Gallo heaped more compliments onto the pile begun by Morasco,
admitting that as long as the duck pond was saved, he would be happy. He made
his usual, somewhat incoherent, description of the real estate domino effect.
He was absolutely certain that any project with a 3,600 page EIR had to meet
all environmental requirements.
Councilwoman Olga Diaz questioned why the project had narrower
wildlife buffer zones than required by the General Plan. She questioned why the
land had been allowed to fall into a decline. She expressed her concern that
the Council had never been presented with complete information about the
Chatham Superfund Site. She was told that it was the responsibility of the DTSC
to inform neighbors about the status of the toxic plumes, but she suggested that
once the property was in the City, the City would bear some responsibility for
such notification. She too complimented New Urban West, but felt there were too
many uncertainties to vote for the project.
Masson chimed in with the New Urban West chorus of praise,
claiming the project would actually reduce the risk of downstream flooding,
concluding, that New Urban West knew the market, and the Council should not
dictate to New Urban West what size of houses to build, or whether or not to
build a gated community.
Abed started his comments calmly—observing that this may have
been the most civil meeting he had ever had. He was very proud of his long
association with New Urban West, noting that New Urban West set the example of
what developers should do. Then Abed became a bit unglued. He said that the
letter from attorney Everett DeLano was so full of inaccuracies as to be an
embarrassment, then went so far as to advise people to avoid the Delano law
firm. He went on to criticize an Op Ed by two members of ENU, Fred Progner
& Ron Forster: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/28/tp-residents-seek-action-to-address-water/#comments-module
, as being 50 to 60 % false. About this point in time, the opponents began to
leave the chambers. Abed went on to beat the conservative mantra about property
rights, and noting that ENU member Laura Hunter was against any development as
far as he could tell. He preferred to ignore the fact that ENU had proposed an
alternative development.
Of course the project was approved four to one. The good ole
boys on the Council lived up to their commitments to the Building Industry
Association. The last item on the agenda was the appointment of a white, male,
general contractor to the Planning Commission. Business as usual.
