Roundtable Digs Into Coastal, Backcountry Development Controversies

Welcome to our discussion of the week's top stories, I am Mark Sauer. Joining me today our reporter Andrew Keats, of Voice of San Diego, welcome back. And K PBS North County Bureau chief Allison St. John. And Lori Weisberg who covers tourism from the San Diego Union Tribune. It is great to have you back. It violates counties growth plans and lies in the heart of wildfire country and first responders worn it is too remote to reach an emergency heard why is a development known as wildlife Hills purge on the be an approved? Start with size and scope Andy, kind of development are we talking about? Is about 600 acres of various parcels, very typical of that part of the county, rolling hills and citrus farms in that kind of thing. They will put about 1700 homes, some retail components and it will end up having school and all the stuff though, the development of that size. A village of 5000 people with 1700 homes built in a fairly remote area. How does this fit in with the county's growth plan which wasn't half that long ago? It does not do that is what makes this such an amount of heartache for everybody. They just passed this growth plan four years ago. And this is just not part of it. This is zoned to be agricultural land and was recently zoned to be agricultural land. Most of what you hear about his major general plan amendments, you can at least say it doesn't fit with the plan but the plan is 30 years old and it did not contemplate the situation we have today. This is just not the case here. This is exactly what was contemplated. And they were aware of this plan coming through at the time the update happened. And I should say that at the time they initiated this project and they submitted initially, the county's landing department at the time just rejected it out of hand and said we do not even recommend getting going down this path. It is so far outside of the realm of our old and new plan we're working on we might as well rejected. Since that time they've got new leadership in the department and they have renamed it and they are now in a position where they will recommend and say the Board of Supervisors should approve it. Will get into the politics and all that but Allison I want to ask you, you mentioned the leapfrog development, what is that? That is easy to understand, it is the idea of a new development landing plop in the middle of is Andy says a rural area. It is leapfrogging over instead of being close to existing infrastructure like Valley Center where a plan calls for growth to happen, it is jumping off into rural areas and that is one of the things that the general plan was designed to prevent specifically, it was laid out clearly in the general plan. What are some of the other problems here that this development will have to address as it moves forward? One big one is the local fire district says the farthest reaches of the project, 1600 acres so it is a very big project, they say they will not have a problem reaching within the county has a standard of five minutes, just to reach someone in the event of an emergency, they will not have any problem reaching the first phases of development but by the end, those people they currently can't reach them within five minutes. So they are going to need to figure out a new station. Right now the problem is there is this gap in the meantime where they will not be enough tax revenue from the project until 10 years later to pay for the station. The developer said we're not going to give you any more money, you'll get plenty of money and upfront fees and eventually tax revenues. There is this question of well, how we make this happen? What the county is resolved to do is to say we can let you get started building now and you have to figure that out later, nevermind the fact there has been almost a decade of wrangling over this issue they have not been able to resolve. That is to calm. Tells about the developer, he said these folks do not take no for an answer. They are a crew of investments, we started our story with the Hernando's family eared it is a family whose own property right in the middle for the development is since the 60s. As part of that property, they own a little road that reach they've - they reach their property through. They came as a they would like to obtain a right-of-way for that road and the family rejected it and said they are not interested and a year later they heard from the company again with a lawsuit saying it turns out that your leaky septic tank is polluting a creek that runs or both of our properties. The problem is there is no water in the Creek. It is dry eared It's dry and the people of their say it has been dry as long as they can remember. Glory? What I find fascinating, going back to the county plan, I remember myself covering that General. plan update years ago . Finally after all of this money and time spent, and one really big project comes along and they are ready to violate the plan. Let's say it does go forward. Then you have set this dangerous precedent that anything comes along, well, we can find a little loophole or little or big exception for any major development, and is your general plan just a worthless document? Yes Weiss and all this time and political capital and energy and money, actual taxpayer money, to update these plans if you don't even honor them? It all comes down to money and the reason they bought the land is because it is pennies on the dollar in terms of cost eared but I wonder if is it really worth it? They are spending so much on lobbying people and now they are going to have to fight probably for it, so much time, you wonder whether these developers would not find it was more efficient to go with the plan and build what they are supposed to build. It is funny you say that, after all the weeks I have spent researching this I have this constant had relation going where I am a how is this the more lucrative way to do this? 1700 homes, sure. Granted, they are smart people, else they would not do it, but no. They have spent no small cost making this happen. We have a good sound bite Vegas right to this point and it is from Steve Aitchison with the developer and let's see what he has to say. If you look at land what is Jaime Baha'i or - what is behind me here, it sells for $2500 per acre and if you get into the community centers everybody knows it will be higher density, consequently more expensive, and it could be up over $250,000, maybe up to $500,000 an acre. I misspoke he is not with the developer but he is against the plan. What about the point? No. That is exactly the model this development, wind cheap land and initiate a political process to up in the development rights of that land. If you run into a roadblock or you run into a rule that says you cannot do something, change the rule or look for loophole around that roadblock and you keep pushing it all costs. That is exactly what they do. There is political intrigue going on as well, we have money that supported politicians of supported folks who were running in the fire district, which is unobscured race. Explain what I am talking about eared They spent huge amounts of money. The developer donated to a political action committee that made donations to a fire district board for instance. The developer donated about $40,000 to that political action committee eared all of the fire districts in the entire County combined, every candidate raise about $13,000 in the same election. That is a lot of money relative to the race. Their years and years of donations going back to supervisor Ron Roberts, supervisor Bill Bourne, small amounts to supervisor Cox. They have basically just recognized there is going to be a certain group of people that will make development decisions ultimately and it is worth it to support. And supervisor Warned may have to step back from this vote, tells about that. He owns 30 acres nearby and it is not adjacent. In fact in the letter on the regulations, he is outside the area that constitutes a clear and direct conflict of interest. However, those rules say if there is a reasonably foreseeable way that you could personally benefit from a decision that you make, you should not be able to vote. The reasonable and foreseeable situation here is if you put 1700 homes and 5000 people in this part of Valley Center this is just become your population center. Forget the general plan you have switched it. This is the village center for Valley Centers of all the properties near their become development opportunities. Couple of seconds left, where will the vote be? And when? This fall, September 11 it will go to the commission and maybe a month after that it will go to the board. And maybe a lawsuit, he knows? Thank you. Voters in Carlsbad may have thought it would be strawberry shields forever when they voted to preserve 2003 acres fronting the Agua Hedionda look and but now an upscale mall could arise against all the strawberries, else and gives an overview of this 85-15 development question that The 85/15 refers to the way the developer selling the project which is it is 85% goes to preserve, 85% of that 200 acre lot as open space, 15% is where the actual retail shopping center will be. So the Strawberry Fields in fact will remain and this is part of the selling point that is that Carlsbad love their Strawberry Fields and they will remain. They will be moved to further east, but really I think what is interesting about this is we know a lot more about that 85% than we do about 15%, which is actually the development. Well, now tell us well where exactly the mall will be, give us an idea, they say it is really kind of different. I must say I think some people are very excited, the developer groups affiliated have built almost 1 dozen malls, shopping centers, shopping-diners-entertainment centers he likes to call them, many are very unique and upscale and some people feel that will be a great thing to bring to San Diego. It will be anchored by Nordstrom's, just off Canon Road, if it is approved eared the question here is there are a lot of people who are in support of this but I think with the question is, is there room to address the problems the community has with this project? The way it is being presented is different and that is what is setting a precedent. We have a soundbite right to that point, we are segueing so nicely here today, this is Bryce Ross Vice President for the development . Something that is really unique that represents what Carlsbad is all about, a great place to spend time with friends and family, low buildings and great character, a lot of community events for the community to come together like movies and the park, concerts in the park, mommy and me, yoga and the park. Yoga in the park, what is not the like? That the developers have done a great job and going out to selling this to certain members, not all people were caught by surprise. This being so does a concept in sort of a lifestyle concept, that is very much his approach to developing, almost like a film set. He will be building where he will be happy to spend your afternoon and a bit of money. [ Indiscernible-low volume ] Right . But there are no renderings with this thing at all. There were at least drawings of what this thing would look like before but the opponents of taken what little detail there is architectural drawers who said we cannot produce a rendering of this development based on the information in this report. So it is all very conceptual at this point. Which I think is why people are concerned about voting on something, which once you have voted on it that is it. It is not the same as the California environmental report where you can go in and tweak things you don't like eared it is like your it is folks, take it or you don't. I was when to ask you about that. They deliberately want this to be part of the process so they do not have to do a formal EIR. That is an environmental impact report. Yes. And they make the counter argument that there are pages and pages of documents on environmental assessment. But does it really measure up to the level of an environmental impact report? Clearly they think there is a reason that it couldn't pass muster with a EIR otherwise why would they do this? I think a lot of people are unhappy with the environmental quality act, some people say it is been abused by people who oppose projects endlessly so this is almost an experiment by the does developer to be using the citizens initiative, whereby he is collected 15% of the voters in Carlsbad in their signatures, which forces it to the ballot and once it is on the ballot you can say yes or no. Because of the Supreme Court rulings just like year, it will not have to go through CEQA. Yes you have this Supreme Court ruling from last year that this is a perfectly valid way of getting around CEQA and you have this coming, and we talked to some people who said you know, this is going to happen. Developers are not silly, they get this opportunity and they will do it they can to get around it. Not everybody thought the petition was exactly honest. We have a soundbite from environmentalist Diane Nigar. People sign the petition thinking they were saving the Strawberry Fields and they of them in time and time again but the signature gatherers forgot to tell them that there is a 585,000 forgot to tell them that there is a 585,000 ft.² shopping center attached to what they thought was saving the Strawberry Fields. They did not mention that. Dishy have a point? Yes. This is a message for all of us, when you see someone collecting signatures, it is really important to read it. In this case people thought in many cases it was just to preserve the Strawberry Fields. And of course the Strawberry Fields were already preserved under a previous proposition in 2000. They thought that it meant that it would go up for a vote and they thought we will get to vote on it in fact it will go to a vote, but it could be just the city Council deciding next week we will go for it and it could not go to the public again it all. Laying that out clearly now, they could go with this in one of two ways. Next Tuesday they want to decide will they go with it and I know the Carlsbad city Council has been waiting for developer to fill this particular space and they like this developer and they like this project. They've analyzed a 4000 page environment report and say it is as good as CEQA but the opponents say no. There any or many of our missile impacts and we want to have more power to make tweaks and changes so it fits our community. If you just go ahead and vote on it when I have a power to do that. What they will likely say if in fact they go this way is wide proving it now save the city the amount of money needed to put into the citizens to vote. It will cost the city across that almost half $1 million to put it to a vote and the developer said at the beginning this project will not cost the taxpayers any money. But it might cost in half 1 million if in fact it has to go to the ballot but he is not offering to pay for that. The signature gathering thing is something we see all the time, every major issue that goes to citizens initiative ends up coming to a point where people say I find a but I did not know what I was signing. There is an incentive to spend to get the signatures. Once the sale that really ugly with the signature gathering and competing signature gatherings and deceptive signature gatherings, Logan had some really ugly ones. Meagher for the California environment quality act that may be long and arduous, everyone admits it is, but at least you have a process which is been worked over the years, working where people can submit their comments and they get addressed, and a lot of projects really are changed before they get finalized as a result of community input. And this case the really is no opportunity, the community input is already been gathered according to the developer. A couple of seconds left. If counsel does go ahead and greenlight this thing, when white we see this? I will call it a mall. [ laughter ] I was reviewing the interview with Caruso back in May, he's I like to do things right but I like to do these things fast and if it is approved will break ground in six months and would like to see it open and 18 months, and 2017 or 2018. Will be out there doing downward dog in the yoga classes. More news concerning lack of development, the coastal commission last week rejected plans for up to three luxury hotels on Harbour Island eared the reason? A lack of affordable, low-cost lodging along the water. If I were a betting man I would wager very few Californians know about this provision in our laws. Lori explain what this is all about and what this provision is they are leaning on? I am wondering why we do not know all about it, including myself until recently, because it is been in the coastal act since 1976 eared they have been working on this. But more recently they have been holding a lot of workshops among themselves because they realize you know, we have had this policy around, this mandate for so many decades and where not really producing what we think we should be producing. Ultimately put developers do not want to build low-cost lodging. So the default position has been to pay and in lieu of the and so they have collected million and millions of dollars, about $90 million, but to million dollars hasn't been spent and so they want to get going with something that will produce more lodging. Is this 19 million up and down the coast? Yes. And while things have gotten done like hospitals and RV parts, nothing in San Diego. What were the origins? What is the whole idea behind low-cost housing by the beach? We all know that the Coastal Act is about preserving access to the water. Part of that thinking was that you also deserve to have overnight access to the water. It originated when they were forming the Coastal Act, originated with the trend of a lot of high cost lodging and condos and apartments taking away this kind of low-cost, traditional motels. That is why they put that into the Coastal Act eared How pricey is it to say stay? Pick a general one. It is costly. [ laughter ] You will spend $300 and I or more will you not? Yeah, even an economy or midscale hotel may be inland will be way higher because it is near the water. So yeah, probably closer to $300. So this from the Coastal Commission what does it realize, $100? Cheaper down by the water? That is the issue eared and five years after the Coastal Act was written and approved there was legislation that said Coastal commission you cannot set hotel rates, and you cannot income qualify people. It is kind of like we will know it when we see it sort of lodging. What they've done is they have gone to inherently affordable things like hospitals because I know those are affordable. Sounds very somewhere to the efforts of trying to get affordable housing, developers almost always opt for paying a token fee if they do not build housing as of the Coastal Commission is now saying we want you to present a project, or what? I think they would like to see it nearby ideally. Or REMS on their development center. Yes, realistically there will not be REMS within the hotel to satisfy, much like what you see with affordable lodging or on the same site, it will not work that way. They want a wider array of things that will get done. Is it more than the Port District that will have to come up with the plan? Or the developer will save they will take the money into something somewhere else on the coast? What the issue is with the Port District is they wanted the port to set aside some set of land on the eastern side of Harbour Island for some affordable lodging where you cannot find another site, and the port right away was not willing to do that right away. They are doing a study and it may not be done until 2018. Tell us about the three hotels I got rejected just here recently, where were they, and as you say it is not likely they will build some low-cost units on the same site. There are 500 rooms, the probably divided up in the three hotels. One is ready to go, it is a 175 room hotel. It is more upscale. [ Indiscernible-multiple speakers ] It is on the eastern end of Harbour Island near a marina that is already there. That is of course over by the airport . We know where it is. But there are no plans for the rest of the hotels would be, the port that we would do midscale economy down there and other hope tell REMS in the coastal commission said we don't even know if that will be affordable. And we doubt it. Explain how these fees are collected to find these low-cost beach lodging. When they cannot develop something or they try to it doesn't work, it is been all over the map, that generally it has been about equivalent to 25% of the total rooms at about $30,000 a room. What has happened to all of this money? You mentioned $90 million was collected overall. About half of it has gone the hostels in Santa Monica, restoring funky kind of cabins and over it Crystal Cove overlooking the water, RV parks, but no separate rooms or motels just for affordable lodging here it It doesn't say like just doing a study seems like an out, if you have seven or 8 million just for San Diego, is that for on the day Russian Mark Recently there were hotels approved for Lane field and liberty Station and collectively this hotels are worth fees of about $7 million, that no way to spend the money or no plan exactly. It is sitting there collecting what interested can? I don't know if they have paid it, probably close to paying it, but there is $2 million it has been sitting there. And no one has come up with a proposal like here's a plot of land? That is germinating and that money doesn't sit with the Coastal Commission and it goes to things like the Coastal Conservancy feet in the state parks department and they are supposed to figure out a way. You can imagine a nightmare, the housing commission has a hard enough time spending their money and they have this entire apparatus of federal and state grants that make it easier on the entire private industry that exists expressly to build affordable housing using these public sources. For this, none of that stuff exists. They are collecting this money with seemingly no real idea of ever how to get it out the door. I know. One commissioner at the meeting said for the port, this is not rocket science, you have the land. Do it. It is empty and support commission you should be able to figure this out. Will that happen anytime soon? We're waiting for the port to come back and they will consult the commissioner on how to revisit this. But the developer was to move ahead with that hotel. I am sure he wants to move ahead but it is all in limbo with the Port commission I am sure you will be following this and enlightening essay been more. That doesn't wrap up another week of sores of the K PBS Roundtable. Hank you Andrew Keats of the voice of San Diego, Allison St. John of K PBS use, and Lori Weisberg of the San Diego Union Tribune. A reminder that all the stories we discussed today are available on our website K PBS.org. I am Mark Sauer thank you for joining us today on the Roundtable.