Campus Park, Rainbow, other sites debated at GP2020 hearing

The commercial and industrial portion of the County of San Diego’s general plan update went to the Board of Supervisors for an initial hearing May 11. The hearing included the expected continuation to May 18 to allow for East County areas to be discussed, but it also included debate on the Fallbrook Campus Park site in Fallbrook, three properties in Rainbow, and a Nelson Way site in the Lilac area.

The hearing wasn’t for the final plan designation of the sites but for the adoption of the baseline map for use in traffic studies and the Environmental Impact Report. The baseline maps for the residential areas of the unincorporated county were adopted in June 2004.

More than 70 meetings of community planning or sponsor groups were held with county staff present to discuss the non-residential portion of General Plan 2020, and five Planning Commission meetings also provided input. Five special study areas, including the Fallbrook Campus Park site, were also considered. In areas such as Fallbrook, where a town center exists, commercial uses are typically focused in the town center area. In areas with less defined centers, such as Bonsall, commercial uses are typically focused in nodes or districts located at major transportation linkages. Industrial districts are typically located in communities adjacent to major regional transportation networks or border crossings.

Three commercial land use designations are retained in the proposed update, two new designations are expected to be added, and two have been eliminated. C-1 (General Commercial) is expected to be retained; that designation is intended for uses requiring large square footages such as neighborhood or strip commercial centers, and development standards are intended to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. C-2 (Office Professional) is also an existing designation which is intended for office and administrative uses as well as limited commercial uses secondary to office use. C-3 (Neighborhood Commercial) is the third existing designation and is intended for limited, small-scale retail commercial and service uses which meet the convenience needs of local residents; development standards restrict the scale of buildings and ensure compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods.

One of the new designations is Rural Commercial (C-4), which is intended for small communities or semi-rural and rural areas. That designation is intended to offer more flexibility in areas where potential land use conflicts are of less concern and would allow for design and development standards responsive to community character. Potential uses include general retail, food and drink, agricultural supplies, visitor-oriented facilities, and offices.

The other new designation is Village Core Mixed Use (C-5), intended for a town center development which reflects a pedestrian scale and orientation with retail uses encouraged at street level. Community-specific zoning will allow a mixture of non-residential and residential development, and the designation can be used for the implementation of comprehensive town center development or revitalization programs.

The designations proposed for elimination are Service Commercial and Visitor-Serving Commercial. Service Commercial was intended for non-retail commercial uses such as wholesaling and warehousing and light industrial uses but resulted in land use conflicts by permitting a broad range of uses including some incompatible facilities. All permitted uses within Service Commercial are accommodated by either General Commercial or Medium Impact Industrial. Visitor-Serving Commercial was intended for uses targeted at the traveling public but did not allow for any uses not allowed in other commercial designations, so Visitor-Serving Commercial designations will be redesignated as General Commercial or Rural Commercial.

The existing Limited Impact Industrial (I-1) will be retained; that designation provides for light manufacturing, processing, and assembly uses with few or low nuisance characteristics or environmental impacts. Limited Impact Industrial does not allow for outdoor activity.

General Impact Industrial will be replaced by Medium Impact Industrial (I-2) and High Impact Industrial (I-3). Medium Impact Industrial provides for light industrial and heavy commercial uses requiring outdoor storage and activities; the addition of that designation allows distinction between outdoor uses with greater impacts (such as aggregate production) and uses with more limited impacts (such as outdoor storage of construction supplies). The High Impact Industrial designation provides for heavy industrial uses related to manufacturing, processing, and assembly activities; outdoor activities are permitted under that designation.

Other new proposed non-residential designations include Open Space Conservation and Open Space Recreation (for regional parks and golf courses); those two categories will replace the Impact Sensitive designation.

Although agricultural land was not included in the needs analysis, zoning (which is separate from plan designations) or major use permits will allow for agricultural uses throughout the county.

The nine General Plan 2020 criteria include five relevant to non-residential updates: reducing public costs, locating growth near infrastructure (including services and jobs), assigning land uses based on the characteristics of the land, creating a model for community development, and obtaining a broad consensus. Planning criteria included compatibility with surrounding uses, compatibility with community character, consistency with projected need, infrastructure support, lack of environmental constraints, and existing use.

The Fallbrook Campus Park site was once intended to be a Hewlett-Packard facility and was designated as a specific plan area in the 1980s. The specific plan included 850 nearby housing opportunities for Hewlett-Packard employees along with light industrial facilities. County staff seeks to add 1,700 to 1,800 dwelling units at the site, at a May 2 meeting the Fallbrook Community Planning Group voted to limit the total number of dwelling units to 1,400, and some Fallbrook residents want fewer homes than that.

“We have a slight disagreement on the special study area,” said Fallbrook Community Planning Group chair Jim Russell. “It’s the gateway to Fallbrook from the south, so we have some concern about it.”

The plans include a transit station, and Russell called for the bus station to be closer to State Route 76. “We think that will make the transportation node concept work,” he said. “We don’t need all that traffic going up on the roads in the community.”

Russell also advocated that property owners help pay to improve the freeway interchange at Highway 76 and Interstate 15.

Three different developers are proposing projects at the Fallbrook Campus Park site, and the planning group’s allocations include minimum lot sizes. “We can translate it to units that we think fit on the ground,” said Harry Christiansen, who chairs the planning group’s Circulation Committee.

Christiansen noted that the usable land actually available is closer to 200 acres rather than the four-digit figure of the specific plan area. The east side includes approximately 300 acres outside the San Diego County Water Authority boundary, the north side includes approximately 200 acres too mountainous for development, and the middle of the site includes about 200 acres planned for open space.

Christiansen added that the small lot sizes proposed were contrary to community character. “It’s a very poor arrangement,” he said.

“Fallbrook is a rural, unincorporated village and we want to maintain the character of that village,” said Jack Wood, who chairs the planning group’s land use committee.

“We’re not against expansion in our community, but we are looking at lot sizes,” Wood said. “We’re going to be there for the next generation. The developers are not.”

Members of Fallbrook FAIR Plan also spoke on the site. “It’s a significant change in land use,” said Jim Tudor.

The Fallbrook FAIR Plan has more than 500 members. “The Fallbrook FAIR Plan is not a wild group of no-growthers,” Tudor said. “We are the people who make our community function. We are that middle-of-the-road silent majority.”

Tudor also noted that the group’s mission statement is identical to that of the group which spearheaded the Fallbrook revitalization plan.

“I think the community has really come together around this issue,” said David Allen. “I believe everyone supports the idea of much lower densities in this area.”

Allen cited the proposed Rosemary’s Mountain quarry as well as other projects in the area. “Fallbrook has certainly taken its fair share of development,” he said.

Allen added that nurseries along Rice Canyon Road would be adversely impacted by development at the level proposed by county staff.

Ree Tudor told the supervisors that she supports development consistent with the existing plan designation and that state law requires a housing plan but not an upzone. “There’s no justification in smart growth for this upzone,” she said.

“We support the existing general plan plus a small percentage to accommodate growth,” said Wallace Tucker.

“Fallbrook in this particular area has been targeted for growth,” Tucker said. “The rationale for it does not seem to be clear.”

Tucker told the supervisors that the proposed residential density is not compatible with county objectives of locating growth near existing infrastructure. “On the contrary, there’s an infrastructure problem. This does not represent smart growth,” he said.

Tucker noted that the existing general plan meets the county’s objectives as well or better as what has been proposed.

“We can and are meeting our fair share of what SANDAG feels the unincorporated area should absorb,” Jackie Heyneman said of Fallbrook’s growth. “I ask you to please be gentle with us.”

Before she moved to Fallbrook, Susan Lucy was born in a small town in Massachusetts, attended college in Boston, worked in New York City, moved to Escondido, and lived in Connecticut and New York State. “One of the common denominators of all these communities was that the people’s voices were important,” she said. “The overwhelming majority of people in Fallbrook do not want a massive upzone.”

Gordon Stubblefield’s great-grandparents moved to Rainbow in 1883 and homesteaded 280 acres. The property was split by US Highway 395, some of the property was sold to pay inheritance taxes, and the alignment of Interstate 15 left the Stubblefields with 106 acres and no access to most of the property. The 3.84 acres currently zoned for commercial are not usable because of sanitation concerns, and the Stubblefields wish to expand the commercially-zoned portion to 9.12 acres.

“The family feels that nine acres out of the original 280 is not an unreasonable request,” Stubblefield said.

Interstate 15 now carries an average daily traffic volume of 270,000 vehicles through Rainbow, and a commercial venture would allow those motorists an opportunity to spend money in unincorporated San Diego County. “The revenues now going to Riverside County will come to San Diego County,” Stubblefield said.

County staff believes that existing commercial land is available in Rainbow, and county staff also wishes to limit development along scenic corridors, one of which is Interstate 15 in the northernmost portion of San Diego County. “Staff has protected viewsheds along the scenic corridor,” said Dahvia Locke, a planner for the county’s Department of Planning and Land Use.

The Rainbow Community Planning Group supports the increased commercial area for the Stubblefield property. The planning group also supports property owners Roberto Frulla and Jeff Scrape on their proposals contrary to DPLU staff recommendations. Both Frulla and Scrape seek Rural Commercial designations for land sought by DPLU to be designated as Semi-Rural Residential, although Scrape would prefer Medium Impact Industrial zoning if possible for his existing business which specializes in infrastructure maintenance for public agencies.

Frulla is proposing a botanical gardens which would require commercial activity such as a retail nursery, arts and crafts, and a coffee shop to justify the investment and maintain the property. “This location is not really suitable for residential area,” Frulla said. “This in my judgment is much better use.”

The planning group recommendation for a C-4 Rural Commercial designation of Frulla’s property was unanimous. “There’s no visual impact to I-15,” said Rua Petty, the vice-chair of the Rainbow Community Planning Group.

Scrape currently operates with a major use permit and is hoping to have a designation which would allow his uses by right. “I’m basically just looking to stay in conformance and continue my operation,” Scrape said.

“This is most definitely the most honest and fitting description,” Scrape said of a proposed industrial designation.

Scrape currently employs about 60 people. “The I-2 designation would allow me to provide employment opportunities,” he said.

County staff and the planning group will continue to work with Scrape to develop a “community specific zone.”

Petty noted that the planning group supports additional commercial land in Rainbow, as residents currently must travel to Fallbrook or Temecula for most commercial purchases.

One of the more controversial North County designation proposals is the Romero General Construction facility on Nelson Way at Old Highway 395. The aggregate processing facility has existed since 1952 and currently has a General Commercial plan designation along with Rural Commercial, or C-40, zoning.

“The C-40 allows us to do what we’re doing and do what we want to do,” said Keith Reilly, the president of Romero General Construction Corporation.

County staff proposed an I-2 designation for Medium Impact Industrial use. “I never said the word I-1 or I-2 or I-3,” Reilly said. “That’s what they designated.”

The designation upzone concerned neighbors. “We don’t have a problem with Mr. Reilly having a recycle business. What we have a problem with is the industrial land use designation,” said Valerie Phillips, the owner of Las Pilitas Nursery. “We are opposed to the Reillys wanting to open an asphalt plant.”

The planning criteria calls for buffering between industrial and residential areas. DPLU staff cites steep topography as separating the industrial and residential areas. Nelson Way residents think otherwise.

“Outdoor industrial uses are always going to be inappropriate adjacent to residential,” said Catherine Cook.

The area is in the Valley Center Community Planning Area but on the border of the Bonsall Community Planning Area, and the area is also within the boundaries of the Bonsall Union School District. Jeffrey Schleger, the superintendent of the Bonsall Union School District, wrote a letter of opposition to the proposed land use designation on the grounds that the industrial use would be hazardous to students near the school bus stop.

“It’s a major bus stop for the kids. Historically it has been,” said Robert Bryant.

Cook has a son at Sullivan Middle School. “I won’t allow him to take the bus right now,” she said.

Cook’s son is in sixth grade; she also has a daughter who is in fourth grade at Bonsall Elementary School.

Marc Nelson, whose family previously owned the Romero General Construction property, has other views. “It was okay for me to get on the bus,” he said.

Nelson went to school in Bonsall before attending Fallbrook High School, from which he graduated in 1977. He feels that the neighbors should be aware that the business existed when they purchased their homes. “There wasn’t a soul in that room that didn’t pass by it to buy their property,” he said. “One phase of that type of business was going on since 1952.”

Neighbors feel that the upzone is not necessary. “They could continue their business as it is today under commercial designation,” said Debbie Flynn.

The Valley Center Community Planning Group supported the I-2 designation, and county staff noted that the site is close to major roads and has good access to Interstate 15 without traveling through residential areas.

“All we want to do is maintain what we have,” Reilly said.

Although neighbors are concerned about what the I-2 designation might allow in the future, Reilly promises to give attention to their considerations. “I want to be a good neighbor,” he said. “Our intention isn’t to wreck the neighborhood by any means.”

The C-40 zoning allows for industrial use, including outdoor activity. “We don’t intend to do mining,” Reilly said. “We’re just trying to manufacture.”