Scale down proposal,
planners say of Star Ranch project
By Nancy Slaff and Billie Jo Jannen
The Alpine Sun
CAMPO — The Campo Lake Morena Community Planning Group reiterated its request that Star Ranch development proponents scale down the massive project application by half.
The July 17 vote followed a presentation that included a lengthy discussion of possible plans to build a valley-wide sewer district and divert Campo Creek water that proponents believe is not being used by downstream recipients, including Mexico.
Co-owner and project manager Doug Paul, followed by project hydrologist John Peterson, consultant George Reams, and land use attorney Bill Swartz all pressured the group to not take a vote that night, saying that it would be premature to accept
or reject the project.
Swartz wanted the planning group to wait to vote on this project until
it goes through further process. He said he wants the scoping letter and the EIR to be completed first.
However, the county is specifically seeking guidance so that it can fine tune the scoping letter that will define how the environmental impact report will be done, said group Chairwoman Bev Esry.
Esry said she had received considerable discussion and guidance from county staff, particularly project planner Bill Stock, and he had advised an early vote to help guide the county to know where the community wishes are headed.
Paul said the plan is in the very early stages and won't be appearing before the San Diego County Board of Supervisors for about two years or more.
Their project application was approved as being complete in 2003, the specific plan in October 2005. The scoping letter is expected shortly and a draft EIR is scheduled to be released in September 2008.
It will include 460 homes, an RV park, a plant nursery, a large commercial area, and the current ranching operation is to be continued.
Former DPLU hydrologist, John Peterson, is now a consultant for Star Ranch and told the group that about about five acre-feet of water would be used for agriculture. He said they planned to use treated wastewater and bring it back up to water landscaping and any agriculture.
George Reams, also a former county staffer and now a consultant for Star Ranch, said about 35,000 gallons per day are treated
now via the county-operated treatment plant, and with Campo Hills
build-out could go to 60-70,000 per day. It can currently handle about 90-100,000 per day and is permitted for 113,000, he said. Star Ranch build-out would increase it to 142,500 per day and, with commercial, an additional 18,000, plus other uses planned for the development such as the RV park.
Reams once assisted the PG in submitting a grant application — later denied — for a groundwater study.
There is current discussion as whether to further upgrade the current facility or build a new facility at Star Ranch.
One plan, according to Reams, is to build a whole new plant on the southern end of the Star Ranch property and recycle the sewage to gray water for local irrigation, instead of discharging it into the lower Campo Creek, where it now flows with unprocessed waters through various private properties to Mexico. He said the facility could eventually serve Lake Morena Village, St. Vincent de Paul’s Children’s Village — proposed for the Lazy A Ranch — and Campo Elementary School.
Reams said that the water is currently “lost downstream to Mexico,” and added, “We’re not aware of any beneficial uses that Mexico would put that water to.” He later said Mexico would still get some water, because there will always be some seepage downstream from the Campo Creek.
Doug Paul later characterized the water flowing to Mexico as “a loss” and said added: “It is our plan to reclaim this water…reclaim it to a higher level…and use that water beneficially.” It could be kept for Campo projects, such as watering the new community park and an oak grove, he said.
It is unknown how a reduction of stream flow in Campo Creek would affect various private properties and riparian habitat and wildlife in the approximately five or six miles between Campo Valley and the point where the creek turns south into Mexico.
Planning group member Bill Slaff objected vigorously to the plan, saying that movement of this water from the Campo Creek stream will impact Mexico and
local residents downstream.
Indeed, in matters that involve changes to wetlands, a permit must be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers, which has authority over all navigable waterways and wetlands, whether seasonal, or not. U.S. Fish and Wildlife and International Boundary and Water Commission would also be consulted in this case, though a IBWC official said the main interest it would be likely to have is in the potential impacts to quantity and quality of groundwater.
Slaff further said that it seems that no one on the Star Ranch development team is listening, as, for three years, the planning group has been offering to approve the project with lower density.
“Instead of lowering density as we offered, your project grew!” Slaff said.
Esry, too, expressed dismay, saying that Star Ranch proponents knew full well what the majority of the community wanted, as they had sat in on numerous workshops related to Cameron Corners and community character.
What Star Ranch wants, she said, is “in your face against the base of GP 2020, our community character, our traffic studies, and the Cameron Corners center.”
Doug Paul said they have seriously considered developing a substantial fire protection system, with a one million gallon water storage tank for firefighting purposes. He said fire safety is playing a large part in their plans.
Planning group member Shirley Perkiss moved that the group disapprove the project based on the
plan as it stands, with Bill Slaff seconding. During brief discussion afterward, Esry said the developers are welcomed to come back for re-consideration if their plans change and the project is scaled back as requested.
Members Larry Johnson, Jean Bates and Bob Shea recused themselves from the vote, as all three are adjacent property owners.
The vote, with three members recused, was 5-1. Robert Kreger, who voted ‘no’ on the motion, said later that he had thought he was voting against the project by voting ‘no’.
In a letter the next day to county staffer Bill Stocks, who is the DPLU project manager for Star Ranch, Esry summed up various discussions by the group, as well as the Monday evening vote:
The conditions for denial are as follows:
The density of the project is too high and the lot sizes are too small. The amount of units should be cut in half. It is in conflict with both our Community Character Statement and our Cameron Corner’s Town Center Plan for GP2020. Both of these documents were written with full knowledge of the Star Ranch proposed project and, therefore, should apply. This project, at its present density, would bring us over our GP2020 build-out population target. Less density will have positive impacts on traffic and light pollution while making it more compatible with our Community Character, rural environment and the new GP2020 plan.
The project’s commercial acreage exceeds the Cameron Corner’s Town Center Plan. The size and extent should be compatible to that plan developed by our community and approved by county.
A concentrated effort should be made to work with the other commercial property owners in that area to make changes that will benefit all.
Following a number of specific recommendations regarding water studies and use of reclaimed water for groundwater recharge, the letter added:
Although we have recommended a denial of this project in its present form, we do believe it is basically a good project, with the exceptions noted above, and could, if revised, benefit our community. This project could have a large effect on the character of this community for many years to come, and realizing it could be worthwhile to deal with a single owner on a large project such as this, we look forward to working with them in the future.
 E-mail
the Editor
|
|
