A 4-3 vote September 11 by the county’s Planning Commission recommended the approval of Accretive Investments’ proposed Lilac Hills Ranch development.
Leon Brooks, Doug Barnhart, David Pallinger, and Bryan Woods voted to recommend with conditions the general plan amendment, specific plan, rezone, tentative map, major use permit, and habitat loss plan for 608 acres on the Bonsall/Valley Center/Escondido border. Michael Beck, Peder Norby, and Michael Seiler voted to recommend denial. Because a general plan amendment, specific plan, and rezone are involved, the proposal must be approved by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors; the county’s Department of Planning and Development Services (PDS) is targeting an October 14 Board of Supervisors hearing date.
“I think we need the housing in San Diego, but I think the housing and the development has to pay the cost,” Barnhart said.
“I’m generally in favor with the project as long as we condition it,” Barnhart said. “I don’t have a problem putting a lot of conditions on the project.”
The Planning Commission’s conditions included the necessary funding to build a new fire station or expand the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s existing Miller station, a community facilities district to fund a three-person crew at the fire station, providing the land and funding construction of a new elementary school at a location to be determined, a 30-foot buffer on West Lilac Road with a 2.2C Mobility Element classification (2.2C has an eight-foot shoulder, 2.2F has a two-foot shoulder), treatment plant improvements to be made no later than the first 100 homes, the commercial village to be built no later than completion of the first 1,000 homes, and a 25 mph design speed on Mountain Ridge Road. The vote at 6:22 p.m. followed a hearing which lasted approximately nine hours.
“Every project has its challenges,” Barnhart said. “The developer can work out the details.”
“There’s a better way to do this,” Norby said.
“I think the project is a beautiful project in isolation,” Norby said. “But land use planning isn’t done in isolation.”
PDS staff had recommended approval of the project with modifications which include a 50-foot buffer to enhance community character and provide screening (the proposal includes a 12-foot buffer), requiring the town center to be developed prior to or concurrent with the third phase, requiring all development to maintain conformance with the conceptual plan, and requiring an agreement with the North County Transit District for a transit stop on the site and to provide interim service to the nearest NCTD transit station until NCTD serves the property. (NCTD has indicated that the completion of the Palomar College campus in Fallbrook along with the Meadowood, Campus Park, and Campus Park West developments would likely make a north-south route from the Escondido Transit Center feasible; such a route could include Lilac Hills Ranch. Two existing NCTD bus routes connect the Escondido Transit Center with Pala Casino; Route 389 has a stop at the park-and-ride by Interstate 15 and State Route 76 which is the nearest stop for the northern part of the Accretive area while Route 388 runs through Valley Center. Accretive consultant Chris Brown told the Planning Commission that a park-and-ride would be provided on-site.)
Accretive has proposed 1,746 residences consisting of 903 single-family detached homes, 164 single-family attached homes, 211 mixed-use residential units, and 468 age-restricted dwellings within a neighborhood designated for senior citizens. The development as proposed would also include 90,000 square feet of commercial office space, a 50-room country inn, a 200-bed group care facility, a recycling facility, a water reclamation facility, a new fire station if not a remodel of the Miller Station, a site for a K-8 elementary school, 13.5 acres of public parks, 11.5 acres of private parks, and 104 acres of biological open space. The proposed general plan amendment would change the land use category from Semi-Rural to Village while revising the Valley Center and Bonsall community plan texts to add the proposed village. The property is within both the Bonsall and Valley Center community planning areas, in the Valley Center Municipal Water District, and in the Deer Springs Fire Protection District. The property is in both the Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District and the Bonsall Unified School District.
Lilac Hills Ranch would be built in five phases over a ten-year period. Approximately four million cubic yards of cut and fill would comprise grading over 504 acres of the project.
The draft Environmental Impact Report included eight project alternatives. The initial draft EIR was circulated for public review in July and August 2013 and a revised EIR was circulated in June and July 2014. The county received 188 comment letters with approximately 3,500 total comments. Although the EIR found that some significant impacts could not be mitigated, PDS staff recommended a finding of overriding considerations including the school site, recreational benefits, and low-income and moderate-income housing along with the tax revenue and employment economic benefits. Lilac Hills Ranch would provide 375 units considered low-income or moderate-income along with 468 senior housing units.
Accretive sought ten waivers from county road standards, and PDS was supportive of seven. One of the waivers PDS recommended denying involves the widening and realignment of curves for West Lilac Road. That widening and realignment would require eminent domain which would take land currently used for agricultural operations but no residences and would also require the realignment of 11 driveways. The Accretive proposal with the ten waivers does not require any eminent domain. The 30-foot buffer with a 2.2F classification would have eliminated any need for eminent domain on the northern end; the 2.2C classification may require some eminent domain.
Traffic from the project would connect to West Lilac Road at a roundabout west of the hairpin curve north of the property boundary, so Accretive would grant the county an easement to realign the road south of the curve but would not build that road. The traffic studies indicate average daily volumes of 12,250 westbound vehicles and 660 eastbound vehicles entering West Lilac Road from the roundabout. Direct impacts to off-site roads would be mitigated in part by new traffic signals at Old Highway 395 and West Lilac, Old Highway 395 and Camino Del Rey, and the northbound and southbound off-ramps from Gopher Canyon Road to Interstate 15. Dedicated turn lanes would be added at the intersection of East Vista Way and Gopher Canyon Road.
Because the California Department of Transportation has no current plans for Interstate 15 improvements for which Accretive could pay its fair share, no mitigation for cumulative impacts to the freeway would occur. “We have some significant and unavoidable impacts to Highway 15,” Norby said.
The Planning Commission hearing on Lilac Hills Ranch began August 7. Public comment was closed at the end of the all-day hearing which was continued officially to an August 12 field trip to the site before the September 11 return to the Planning Commission hearing room. Public testimony was re-opened September 11 but limited to information from the site visit which included roads, the park-and-ride at Interstate 15 and State Route 76, the Deer Springs Fire Protection District station, and the Lower Moosa Water Reclamation Facility.
The September 11 public testimony included three group presentations, including one from the Valley Center Community Planning Group and one from the Bonsall Sponsor Group, along with 30 individuals who submitted speaker slips. The Valley Center Community Planning Group voted 11-2 to recommend denial April 13. The Bonsall Sponsor Group vote May 5 was 4-0 to recommend denial. On April 6 the Valley Center Design Review board recommended denial on a 3-0 vote with one abstention.
“The roads in this project site area are narrow, they’re winding, and they can only carry limited traffic,” said Valley Center Community Planning Group vice-chair Ann Quinley.
“This just won’t cut it in our opinion. It opens up the county to some injury lawsuits,” said Bonsall Sponsor Group vice-chair Chuck Davis.
Davis cited an estimated additional traffic volume of 7,000 average daily trips. “The big gorilla in the room is I-15,” he said. “You’ve got a freeway that’s failing and a lot of traffic from this project is going to dump on I-15.”
Cumulative impacts, although not the Lilac Hills Ranch development on its own, would reduce the level of service on I-15 from E to F. “Something has to be done. We’re not serving the existing residents, let alone future residents, with a good freeway system,” Davis said.
“The project as proposed will cause many significant and irreversible changes to our community,” said Valley Center Community Planning Group chair Oliver Smith.
“It is change where change is not needed,” Smith said. “It is the wrong development in the wrong place.”
Bonsall Sponsor Group member Phillip Schwartze is professionally a planning consultant whose experience includes preparing general plans for the cities of Solana Beach and Solvang and past employment for the cities of San Juan Capistrano and Anaheim. “Lilac Hills is one of the worst plans I have seen in my 50-year career,” he said.
“There are a number of impacts that are created with no mitigation,” Schwartze said. “They’re creating more problems than they’re fixing.”
The September 11 comment also included remarks from Accretive traffic engineering consultant John Boarman and Accretive fire protection planning consultant Mike Huff. “The project will fund many off-site traffic improvements that will greatly enhance safety,” Boarman said.
“This project connects two main evacuation roads,” Huff said. “It also connects six existing dead-end roads.”
“The roads have been developed to meet the county consolidated fire code,” Boarman said.
Many of the individual citizens who spoke in support of the project cited the off-site road improvements. “There’s a need to improve the roads,” said Jon Frandell, who represented the Fallbrook Chamber of Commerce. “It is developers who are going to pay for the improvements.”
“It will improve the roads,” said Bonsall Chamber of Commerce member Marciya Winchester. “This is a very positive thing.”
“There will be an opportunity to correct something that’s been in existence for a long time,” said Carole Hodges, who lives on Sunrise View Road in Fallbrook.
“My concerns were answered by the local fire district when they approved the fire protection plan,” said Via Monserate Road resident Elizabeth Buenrostro.
“The developers are going to help save lives,” said Sunrise View Road resident Paul Schumann. “It’s all about road safety and the developers have the ability to do that.”
Schumann also praised the mixed-use composition of Lilac Hills Ranch. “Self-contained communities have been proven to reduce the number of road trips,” he said. “That unblocks the highways and the freeways.”
Bob Leonard was the Fallbrook Chamber of Commerce executive director during the October 2003 and October 2007 fires for which Valley Center was evacuated. In 2007 approximately 50,000 Fallbrook residents were evacuated. “It does compare exceptionally well to other projects that have been approved,” he said of Lilac Hills Ranch.
Accretive and the Deer Springs Fire Protection District, in possible conjunction with CalFire and with the county for approval of the property tax collection procedure, would determine the specific method to achieve a five-minute response time throughout Lilac Hills Ranch. “It’s not our purview,” Woods said.
The travel time from the nearest Deer Springs Fire Protection District station to the northern part of the project is seven minutes, which exceeds the general plan’s five-minute standard for village areas. The county currently has an Amador contract with CalFire for the Miller station to operate year-round, but CDF stations are not obligated by law to provide structural fire protection or emergency medical services.
“They cannot build unless they meet the five-minute response time,” Woods said. “That guarantees that the safety issue will be addressed.”
At no point will a response time of greater than five minutes be allowed. “It will be looked at when every phase is developed,” Brooks said. “I’m comfortable with that because there’s some mechanism to see that it happens.”
“They can’t build phases unless they follow that rule,” Woods said. “I think each phase stands on its own.”
“The first phase can’t proceed until they meet the five-minute travel time,” said PDS project manager Mark Slovick.
A community facilities district has been formed for Horse Creek Ridge, which is the residential component of Campus Park, and includes the North County Fire Protection District along with the County of San Diego. The Deer Springs Fire Protection District has not yet considered such a district for Lilac Hills Ranch, although Deer Springs fire chief Robert Osby indicated that the district would consider approval of proposals. The Horse Creek Ridge community facilities district also includes an agreement with the county which covers law enforcement, flood control, and other county services. “It is common as a condition of approval,” PDS director Mark Wardlaw said of a community facilities district.
Wardlaw added that the assessment process for a community facilities district must include knowledge of land, construction, administrative, and operations costs. “It is important that the facilities be adequately scoped,” he said. “If it’s inadequate then somebody is left holding the bag, usually the public.”
“I think the service is addressed adequately,” Pallinger said.
Pallinger also cited the road improvements. “I think those are going to be a benefit to the existing community,” he said.
Since most of the development in the Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District would be age-restricted, the majority of school-age children in the Lilac Hills Ranch area would be in the Bonsall Unified School District even though the currently-planned school site is within the VCPUSD boundaries. “It’s a very difficult proposition for both districts,” said VCPUSD superintendent Mary Gorsuch. “The responsibility to build the school is on the Valley Center-Pauma District with only $2 million.”
Under the current boundaries the development anticipates 668 new BUSD students with developer school fees of $7,656,800 and 370 new VCPUSD students with developer fees of $1,974,251. The estimated cost for a K-8 school site is $25 million to $30 million, although that does not include furnishings. “All they’re going to do is build you the walls,” Barnhart said.
“It’s only fair for Accretive to fully mitigate the impact of education,” Gorsuch said. “They need to put that in writing.”
The VCPUSD annual budget is approximately $40 million and the district has approximately $7 million in reserves. “We’re willing to work with Accretive on a plan,” Gorsuch said.
Brown noted that Accretive has been in discussion with BUSD superintendent Justin Cunningham. “Part of that negotiation has been building a turnkey school,” Brown said. “They are fine with us building them a turnkey site.”
Accretive may fund a study on a possible boundary change between the two school districts. “It appears that the best for them is to have their development be in only one district,” Gorsuch said.
“There is no fight between the Valley Center-Pauma school district and the Bonsall district,” Brown said. “We intend to work together for mutual solutions.”
Although the school district boundaries could be adjusted, the possibilities also include BUSD operating a charter school within the VCPUSD boundaries. “We understand our commitment to education in the community,” Brown said. “We have to contribute.”
At this point BUSD is planning to utilize portable classrooms, although Barnhart questions how temporary those would be. “Once those relocatables hit the site, they rarely go away,” he said.
Gorsuch does not expect the additional students to cause a net operational loss once the school is constructed. “The funding from the state from attendance should cover the cost of the teachers,” she said.
Brown was willing to state Accretive’s commitment for the record. “We will absolutely work with the school district and then we will build them a school,” he said. “If the school site needs to be somewhere else we will build it and we will pay for it.”
(The payment may be through the community facilities district assessment rather than from Accretive.)
Because of the conversion of agricultural irrigation to a development which includes recycled water infrastructure, the demand for potable water would actually decrease. The current annual use of 704 acre-feet includes 513 acre-feet of potable water along with 191 acre-feet of groundwater. After build-out the expected 1,290 annual acre-feet of water use would consist of 487 acre-feet of potable supply, 323 acre-feet of conservation water, 289 acre-feet of recycled water, and 191 acre-feet of groundwater. Existing wells can serve the construction demand of 45,000 gallons per day and the completion of the first phase would allow for recycled water to be used.
Photovoltaic systems would provide approximately 22 percent of the project’s energy needs; the project currently envisions 2,000 kilowatts of on-site solar energy systems.
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment process has assigned 905 moderate-income and low-income housing units to Valley Center and 178 units to Bonsall. Lilac Hills Ranch would provide 168 moderate-income units, 102 low-income units, and 105 very low income units. As of 2014 permits have been issued for only 10 percent of the county’s RHNA requirement which must be met by 2020.
“This project will aid in meeting the housing projections,” said PDS project planning division acting chief Cara Lacey.
Norby argued that the county’s RHNA obligation was identifying locations rather than constructing. “The obligation is to plan for it, not to build it,” he said.
The entirety of the project would add 1,541 dwelling units to the Valley Center planning area and 205 units to the Bonsall planning area. The general plan calls for 6,371 additional Valley Center units and 2,138 additional Bonsall units.
The Lilac Hills Ranch area is, by automobile, 24 minutes to the Valley Center village area and 16 minutes to the Bonsall village area. Lacey told the Planning Commission that the development could support 90,000 square feet of commercial space and that residents from within five miles of the project would also likely patronize those businesses. “The project could fill a necessary gap and a village could work in this area,” she said.
The Bonsall Community Plan and the Valley Center Community Plan would need to be amended the add the new village area.
“A village could be accommodated in the area,” Lacey said. “It implements the community development model.”
Phase 1 includes 352 single-family dwelling units, Phase 2 includes a total of 466 dwelling units, and Phase 3 includes 460 dwelling units. At this point Accretive plans to build Phase 1 and then Phase 4 before building Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 5.
“It’s a very good project within itself,” Woods said.
“This is resident-serving commercial,” Norby said. “It is not a town center as far as I’m concerned.”
“We are creating the loophole of all time for trying to do smart growth in the county,” Beck said.
“I actually don’t think this is a bad project,” Beck said. “This to me is more like the build-out in Santee of Fanita Ranch.”
Seiler lives in a part of southern San Diego County which was impacted by the Eastlake development. “This project to me is analogous to what happened in South Bay,” he said. “The project is oversized as planned.”
Moderate income translates to home sale prices between
$300,000 and $500,000. Seiler noted that homeowners’ association fees and property taxes including community facilities district assessments would be added to the mortgage payment amount. “It’s going to be very hard to have a single working individual provide the amount of money that’s going to be necessary to make payments,” he said.
“In many cases, they will be commuting off-site,” Seiler said. “Those adult residents living within the project will have to commute to off-site jobs.”
Seiler did not take issue with the design of Lilac Hills Ranch. “The community is designed very well,” he said. “The additional housing is not needed to support community growth.”
Pallinger noted that the project has no hilltop development or major grading elevation changes. “They’ve certainly accommodated their physical constraints,” he said.
Pallinger noted the proximity to Interstate 15. “It certainly is a major transportation corridor,” he said.
Barnhart came to San Diego County as a Naval officer in 1973. He and his wife moved to Poway, since his wife was from Texas and Poway at the time resembled the Texas atmosphere, and he commuted to Naval Air Station North Island.
“The growth is coming. You cannot stop it,” Barnhart said.
“It will transform in many aspects the west end of Valley Center and the east end of Bonsall,” Barnhart said. “There’s going to be some clear winners. There’s going to be some clear losers.”
Barnhart built the elementary school in Valley Center in 1986 and first built a school in Temecula in 1987. “People moved up there because that’s where the housing was,” he said. “We’re going to have a certain amount of population growth no matter what.”
Pallinger also cited San Diego employees living in Temecula. “Actually having this development closer to the employment center reduces our greenhouse gases,” he said.
Norby is a lifelong San Diego County resident who celebrated his 53rd birthday the day prior to the Planning Commission hearing. “I’ve seen good growth and I’ve seen bad growth,” he said. “We have the choice how we can grow. We can’t prevent growth, but we certainly can plan for it.”
Norby lived in the Del Cerro area of San Diego until he was 18 and has lived in Carlsbad for the past 34 years. He noted that in the past 25 years Carlsbad’s population has quadrupled from 25,000 to 106,000. “It has been planned,” he said. “We have stuck to that plan.”
“I find this project to be inconsistent with land use policies,” Beck said. “We have changed trajectory. We have actually changed trajectory at a fundamental level.”
The post Planning Comm. votes 4-3 in favor of Lilac Hills Ranch appeared first on Village News.