Quantcast
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs

It's back – Lilac Hills near Valley Center

Not on the agenda, but...

Proposed site of development (east of I-15)
Proposed site of development (east of I-15)

It wasn't on the county planning commission's May 15 agenda, but Lilac Hills Ranch, a proposed subdivision near rural Valley Center, came up - just like it keeps coming back.

The county had given the current developer, Ranch Capital, a May 20 deadline to withdraw the project – which includes 1,746 homes, retail and a 200-bed assisted living facility – due to serious fire safety flaws.

Attempts to obtain easements for brush clearing from property owners along West Lilac Road, a planned evacuation route, had failed. Lacking a viable alternative, the project is headed to the board of supervisors on June 24 with a recommendation of denial, said Mark Wardlaw, director of Planning & Development Services.

But the developer chose not to withdraw.

With the deadline looming, commissioners discussed finding "solutions" to the impasse. Last week, an attorney for two environmental groups warned the commission in a letter that their "discussion and action at the May 15 meeting violated the Brown Act."

That is, Lilac Hills wasn't anywhere on the agenda, so those who might want to weigh in had no notice.

Under the Brown Act, topics not on the agenda are limited to things like asking a question for clarification and brief announcements or reports. The discussion "went far beyond" the types of comments allowed on non-agendized topics, and lasted for over twenty minutes, the letter said.

The conversation began with mention of the deadline to fix the fire safety issue.

"I'm a bit dismayed," said commissioner Edwards, citing how much time and effort staff and the commission had put into it, and volunteering to help resolve the issues before it goes to the board. He suggested setting up "a short ad hoc meeting with an ad hoc group to report back to the commission."

According to the letter from attorney Sara Clark, doing so "would directly conflict with county requirements" regarding impartial, transparent decision-making. The solution-finding would "presumably take place behind closed doors and without any public input," leaving the public out of the conversation about serious safety issues.

A few commissioners said they thought it was permissible to form an ad hoc committee without public notice, they had done it before.

"I for one think it's possible to find a solution, and I'd like the opportunity to forward that to the board" said commissioner Woods - if the director allowed them to form a subcommittee. "Which I think we can on our own but I'm not sure on that issue."

Neither was the chairman.

"Can we?" he asked the county counsel. "I don't want to discuss the item, but is it possible to, in a general question?" If an issue arose with a project, and commissioners are volunteering their time to meet with staff and the applicant, is that allowed?

It was "probably something an ad hoc committee can do for a limited purpose and time," said county counsel Thomas Montgomery, but since it wasn't before them that day, they couldn't make any decisions. "I don't believe you can appoint an ad hoc committee to work with the applicant" - it would have to be put on a future agenda.

The idea didn't sit well with commissioner Seiler.

"I'm getting a real uncomfortable feeling that we'd put an ad hoc committee together to promote a project that's already been found inadequate relative to fire protection," he said.

"If commissioners go into an ad hoc committee to do that, to find a way to make this work, I think by right they should be recused from voting on that project. They now have a vested interest in it."

In an update on the project, Mark Wardlaw, director of planning & development services, described how it was first proposed by the Accretive Group in 2012, later rejected by voters, then in 2017 was picked up by a new applicant.

"Then came the worst fires that California has seen."

There was also a change in fire marshall services with the Deer Springs Fire Protection District. For those reasons, the fire authority reviewed the project and raised a series of concerns about its fire safety design and evacuation suitability.

Despite clear direction about necessary changes, only a few were able to be incorporated, along with some alternative routes. But the main problem is the inability to obtain 20-foot easements along West Lilac Road.

"We've been working with the applicant for over a year to address those issues and the fire authority has determined that the project is unsafe as currently designed," he said.

The meeting ended with chairman Barnhart announcing he would appoint commissioners Edwards and Woods, who also expressed interest, to an ad hoc committee. And they would put it on the agenda the next time.

"It's pretty tough to get a project through this commission if you've got the fire authority saying it's unsafe," the chairman said.

"But I'm not so sure the accommodations can't be made."

Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all

Previous article

Sanctified and glorified at Encanto Southern Baptist Church

Life is important on this side of death, but what really matters is eternity.
Next Article

Oceanside Democrats feud over membership

Club stacking just part of growing pains?
Proposed site of development (east of I-15)
Proposed site of development (east of I-15)

It wasn't on the county planning commission's May 15 agenda, but Lilac Hills Ranch, a proposed subdivision near rural Valley Center, came up - just like it keeps coming back.

The county had given the current developer, Ranch Capital, a May 20 deadline to withdraw the project – which includes 1,746 homes, retail and a 200-bed assisted living facility – due to serious fire safety flaws.

Attempts to obtain easements for brush clearing from property owners along West Lilac Road, a planned evacuation route, had failed. Lacking a viable alternative, the project is headed to the board of supervisors on June 24 with a recommendation of denial, said Mark Wardlaw, director of Planning & Development Services.

But the developer chose not to withdraw.

With the deadline looming, commissioners discussed finding "solutions" to the impasse. Last week, an attorney for two environmental groups warned the commission in a letter that their "discussion and action at the May 15 meeting violated the Brown Act."

That is, Lilac Hills wasn't anywhere on the agenda, so those who might want to weigh in had no notice.

Under the Brown Act, topics not on the agenda are limited to things like asking a question for clarification and brief announcements or reports. The discussion "went far beyond" the types of comments allowed on non-agendized topics, and lasted for over twenty minutes, the letter said.

The conversation began with mention of the deadline to fix the fire safety issue.

"I'm a bit dismayed," said commissioner Edwards, citing how much time and effort staff and the commission had put into it, and volunteering to help resolve the issues before it goes to the board. He suggested setting up "a short ad hoc meeting with an ad hoc group to report back to the commission."

According to the letter from attorney Sara Clark, doing so "would directly conflict with county requirements" regarding impartial, transparent decision-making. The solution-finding would "presumably take place behind closed doors and without any public input," leaving the public out of the conversation about serious safety issues.

A few commissioners said they thought it was permissible to form an ad hoc committee without public notice, they had done it before.

"I for one think it's possible to find a solution, and I'd like the opportunity to forward that to the board" said commissioner Woods - if the director allowed them to form a subcommittee. "Which I think we can on our own but I'm not sure on that issue."

Neither was the chairman.

"Can we?" he asked the county counsel. "I don't want to discuss the item, but is it possible to, in a general question?" If an issue arose with a project, and commissioners are volunteering their time to meet with staff and the applicant, is that allowed?

It was "probably something an ad hoc committee can do for a limited purpose and time," said county counsel Thomas Montgomery, but since it wasn't before them that day, they couldn't make any decisions. "I don't believe you can appoint an ad hoc committee to work with the applicant" - it would have to be put on a future agenda.

The idea didn't sit well with commissioner Seiler.

"I'm getting a real uncomfortable feeling that we'd put an ad hoc committee together to promote a project that's already been found inadequate relative to fire protection," he said.

"If commissioners go into an ad hoc committee to do that, to find a way to make this work, I think by right they should be recused from voting on that project. They now have a vested interest in it."

In an update on the project, Mark Wardlaw, director of planning & development services, described how it was first proposed by the Accretive Group in 2012, later rejected by voters, then in 2017 was picked up by a new applicant.

"Then came the worst fires that California has seen."

There was also a change in fire marshall services with the Deer Springs Fire Protection District. For those reasons, the fire authority reviewed the project and raised a series of concerns about its fire safety design and evacuation suitability.

Despite clear direction about necessary changes, only a few were able to be incorporated, along with some alternative routes. But the main problem is the inability to obtain 20-foot easements along West Lilac Road.

"We've been working with the applicant for over a year to address those issues and the fire authority has determined that the project is unsafe as currently designed," he said.

The meeting ended with chairman Barnhart announcing he would appoint commissioners Edwards and Woods, who also expressed interest, to an ad hoc committee. And they would put it on the agenda the next time.

"It's pretty tough to get a project through this commission if you've got the fire authority saying it's unsafe," the chairman said.

"But I'm not so sure the accommodations can't be made."

Sponsored
Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all
Previous article

What opera is closest to California redwoods?

Tough competing with the English and Austrians
Next Article

Football: a career low for Lucille Ball

A darker shade of twilight
Comments
1

That's why the business-y types in the County government changed the name from the Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU) to Department of Planning and Development Services (DPDS) - they will bend over backward to develop whatever open, non-park land is left in San Diego or San Diego County even though it means more sewage line to run, more strain on the electrical grid, more garbage for the dumps. These clowns still have a website for the project (www.lilachillsranch.com), so they will fight for it to the bloody end - even though it is a luxury development and much of it will remain empty (permanent market houses, much like the luxury towers Downtown.)

June 2, 2020

Sign in to comment

Sign in

Art Reviews — W.S. Di Piero's eye on exhibits Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed Best Buys — San Diego shopping Big Screen — Movie commentary Blurt — Music's inside track Booze News — San Diego spirits City Lights — News and politics Classical Music — Immortal beauty Classifieds — Free and easy Cover Stories — Front-page features Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts Famous Former Neighbors — Next-door celebs Feast! — Food & drink reviews Feature Stories — Local news & stories From the Archives — Spotlight on the past Golden Dreams — Talk of the town Here's the Deal — Chad Deal's watering holes Just Announced — The scoop on shows Letters — Our inbox [email protected] — Local movie buffs share favorites Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news News Ticker — News & politics Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated Of Note — Concert picks Out & About — What's Happening Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated Poetry — The old and the new Pour Over — Grab a cup Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers Reading — The hunt for intellectuals Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails San Diego Beer News — Inside San Diego suds SD on the QT — Almost factual news Set 'em Up Joe — Bartenders' drink recipes Sheep and Goats — Places of worship Special Issues — The best of Sports — Athletics without gush Street Style — San Diego streets have style Suit Up — Fashion tips for dudes Theater Reviews — Local productions Theater antireviews — Narrow your search Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads Waterfront — All things ocean Your Week — Daily event picks
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs
Close