PLANNING GROUP
By DAVID ROSS
Valley Center had a conversation with itself Monday about what kind of shopping center it wants, an issue that almost everyone concedes is the most important decision to be made about this community for many years to come.
Opponents of the Village Square at Valley Center say it violates the design guidelines. Supporters say that “is in the eye of the beholder.”
But one VC man, Calvin Kooistra, may have summed up the man on the street attitude when he declared, “Bottom line: People want to shop. They want to be able to pull in and get their groceries and go home again.”
The VC planning group must decide whether to accept a recommendation by the shopping center subcommittee to reject the shopping center’s plan— It will make that decision by the end of May.
It heard a presentation by Weston Valley Center LLC, the developer; reports by the shopping center subcommittee; a minority subcommittee report, and a presentation by subcommittee member Lael Montgomery which might also qualify as a minority report of sorts.
Words continued to flow until about 9:45 p.m., when the group voted to postpone statements by its members and a final vote until May 24, 7 p.m., at a location to be announced.
Over 150 people attended the meeting at VC Community Hall. Speakers were evenly divided, with more audience members supporting the shopping center than opposing it, judging from the applause.
Unlike many past community meetings on controversial issues, this one was characterized by good humor and politeness.
Harris Shapiro, architect for the center, described the project, which includes 187,000 sq feet of office and commercial and 63 condos, with two office buildings of two stories each.
Retail space includes a market, drug store and ancillary shops.
There are two parks, a large outdoor plaza and a food court. One park is 80 ft. by 90 ft. The other is one half acre.
In front of all the shops will be sidewalks 20 ft wide with 40 feet wide sidewalks at the food court.
The plan allows for pedestrian and bike traffic and crosswalks between the “main street” and private roads.
The market around which the center will orbit will be 55,000 sq. feet, which will be masked so it doesn’t look so large.
There will be no monotone roof line.“We want it to be as aesthetically pleasing as possible,” he said.
Jim Chagala, a retired veteran county planner who now does land use consulting, told planners that Weston has received a “scoping letter,” county staff’s initial reaction to the project.
“Staff reviewed it according to the design guidelines. Their preliminary indications is that [after some minor changes had been made] they felt that it met the guidelines,” said Chagala.
Chagala quoted from the document, first adopted in 1986. He noted that both developers and community are admonished by the guidelines to be “flexible.”
“We are comfortable that this fits in with what the guidelines say, and that it falls into the spirit of the guidelines,” he said.
Since much of the discussion revolves around whether the center forms an actual “town center,” Chagala commented, “It seems that we are trying to get this property to take on all of the burdens of the town center. This is just one part of that area.”
He concluded, “Valley Center’s real character is established by its lot size and character and people working on agriculture. With that kind of orientation you are going to have to have autos, because that’s how people get around, and with autos, they want convenience, and they want parking, and they want it as close to the store as possible.”
Project’s engineer Gary Wynn concluded with “This is a real project. We haven’t had much new that’s come to VC that’s very exciting. We’ve figured out how to sewer this without cost to the public and it could happen soon.”
He warned, “If this is passed over there may be many years before something else like it comes to town.”
Sandy Smith, chairman of the planning group and chairman of the shopping center subcommittee, noted that a year ago her committee submitted its concerns about the center.
A year later Weston submitted a revised site plan, which the subcommittee received on April 24.
It met April 30 to review the feedback and the revised map. On May 7 the subcommittee met again and voted to reject the current proposal and recommend that it be redesigned to comply with the design guidelines.
“The developer is trying to make a decision on his project by the end of May. I’m not at all certain that we can get to a motion tonight, but I do want to schedule that meeting by the end of the month,” said Mrs. Smith.
Larry Glavinic, the lone subcommittee member dissenting on that recommendation, explained why in a document which includes a three column table of issues raised by the subcommittee and the developer’s response.
Of 84 issues raised, Schaffer complied with 60. Another four he didn’t support totally. “There are sixteen that are interpretive, i.e. in the eye of the beholder as to whether they comply or don’t.”
Glavinic first heard of the project about a year before the first presentation was made to the planning group. “Wynn showed how they could make it work with a septic that includes wastewater treatment. Then he showed me the proposed shopping center. He showed a typical shopping center.”
At that time Glavinic, then chairman of the group, told Wynn that a typical shopping center “wouldn’t work.” Much work was done to change that.
The planning group at first supported the shopping center concept 10-1. “The planning group felt that we needed to look at some specific issues. so the subcommittee was born. It’s role was to review the center and provide some conditions.”
It took so long for the project to come back because of the technical challenges in getting the special wastewater treatment system approved, which needed water district support.
“When the scoping letter came back from the County there was very little about the design guidelines, and that is because they are guidelines, they are not concrete,” said Glavinic.
“In rejecting the project, you hear from the subcommittee that the guidelines weren’t applied. I think that’s a big lie.”
The developer made many changes from its first proposal, he said, addressing the charge that Weston was “uncooperative.”
As to the shopping center being “too large,” Glavinic said, “That decision is out of our hands. Over a decade ago the land was given a zoning. By right you can do certain things on the land whether you like it or not.”
“I think we need to focus on the good the shopping center can provide. There’s lots of good here. Of 73 acres, 30 are leach fields and will stay the same. I think that’s great.
“All of us drive too much. This will reduce a lot of travel and maybe save a few lives.”
It will also provide less expensive housing, he said.
The design review board has not yet met on the project.
“Until it does, for the subcommittee to say it doesn’t meet the guidelines is the height of arrogance,” he said. “You may not like all the details of this, but it’s going to work and continue to work unless we all get rid of our cars.”
He concluded by noting that the owners aren’t developers from Boston or Minnesota. “These are local guys. They will still be here after the center is built. Do you want that or some slick guys coming out here building a huge center that will be sewered?”
Lael Montgomery argued that “the planning group should use the planning tools that we have to bring about a real town center.”
She showed aerial photos of the proposed center superimposed over the town center.
County zoning ordinances require the group to review the site plan and the design board to review the designs. Both review site plans for the town center.
“The community plan requires that the site plan be approved before the design is approved,” she said.
The planning group must find that the project complies with goals and policies.
“The plan the developer has produced is a completely different entity by what was envisioned by the design guidelines,” she said. “This will create a large shopping center and doesn’t comply with community goals.”
The plan doesn’t relate to the lands around it, she said. “It is a car centered suburban shopping center dominated by an urban parking lot. The developer says he needs to attract what most people say they don’t want, national anchors. It just doesn’t comply with the community plan.
“It creates a walled suburban community and only preserves five of these majestic oaks. It doesn’t meet the community plan goals for conservation.
“Public space is mainly the eight acre parking lot. The public park is between two buildings, and is smaller than one of these buildings. The Community plan’s open space goals are not met,” said Dr. Montgomery.
The guidelines say that the site plan must contribute to design goals, which is a traditional town center, she noted. “There is no no confusion among professionals as to what this means. Weston’s plan goals fails to meet them.”
She concluded, “The developer wants to build a shopping center not the town center called for in our guidelines and called for in all of our community meetings. VC deserves a real town center. We should require that the development play by the same rules as other developers. The community church, even Automotive Specialists, are being required to comply at great expense.”
Montgomery introduced several out-of-town experts representing groups that are promoting the “smart growth” concept.
A letter was read from a SANDAG (San Diego Assn. of Governments) smart growth consultant who argued that the community would “rob itself” of community smart growth grants since SANDAG is “about to adopt a sweeping smart growth document that will change how funding is given.”
“Funding for transit will only go to those communities that use smart growth goals. For the first time goals will have teeth. The proposed shopping center does not meet VC’s community plan much less that of SANDAG.”
Lynn Baker from the Housing Network said she wanted to debunk several myths, 1) that if you redesign the shopping center you won’t attract good shops, 2) that auto friendly and pedestrian friendly are not incompatible.
She noted that people buy more from retail stores “when they are happy.” She added, “You can get the stores you want.”
When centers are friendly with convivial restaurants, women, the main spenders of income, will eat and drink, get a little tipsy and buy things.
“Pedestrian oriented centers create bigger tax basis,” she said. “Your goal is when it gets done it looks like you, not like another bunch of places.”
A representative from Walk San Diego talked about how nice it is to have places where people can walk. He used Disneyland’s Main Street as an example.
Finally, John Ruggieri, who designed the “alternate” shopping center, said he volunteered to work with the subcommittee, “because I feel passionately about creating places we can be proud of and that we can use. We want to create a place that’s a town center, a village center. This is a nice building, but it ain’t nothing more than a shopping center. We can do better.”
He said he did drawings to “create a successful urban village. I met with the developer and tried to be very gracious and create a center, but it was roundly rejected.”
Public comment varied, but here are some examples.
Keith Davis said Schaffer was capable of redesigning his center, “but he looks at things that are suburban and urban rather than rural. . . .”
Val Wynn said, “Mr. Schaffer has done a very unique plan to dispose of the sewage. I did five major plans for Mr. Schaffer. He’ll do what he says he’ll do and that means a lot in this day and age.”
Patsy Fritz said, “This is somebody’s wish list. . . . Let the opponents of this project get together a consortium, raise $6 million, and say ‘Hey, Mr. Schaffer, we’ll buy you out and put in our dream.’ ”
Jon Vick observed, “The guidelines say that large oaks are significant resources to be preserved. The developer did not do a diligent job of taking these oaks into account.”
Linda Lockyear, a professor at Palomar College, wanted to make the point that almost no one lives and works in VC and so they shouldn’t have difficulty visiting a shopping center in Escondido. However her point was diluted when close to half of the room raised their hands when asked if they worked in VC.
Herb Schaffer, one of the owners of the property, observed, “When I go to a store I rush to the nearest parking space near the store.” He indicated the people in the room and said, “Most of these people have two acres, they don’t need to have a place to walk around, they have their own property to walk around.”
Gary Broomell said, “I’m an extremely conservative individual that believes in property rights. I believe that Mr. Schaffer owns the property. He’s hired people that do this for a living, and he should be allowed to go ahead with this thing. They have every right in the world.”
Fran DeWilde said that VC already has most services that people need. “I feel that the new shopping center may very well tear the heart out of Valley Center and destroy the essence of what we came here to get.”
Don Richards said, “If you see vc as an urban center, then this center fits perfectly. if you see this community as rural you’ll agree with the subcommittee.”
Dave Smith complained about the lack of integrated plans and asked, “Why do you always have to create new shopping centers instead of cleaning up the existing shopping?”
One woman complained, “The cancer I see spreading up that grade is suburbia.”
Another man said, “When I look at that mall I see Carlsbad and Temecula and every other mall I’ve ever seen.”
Craig Johnson said, “If this project is approved it preempts all commercial development around it. It confers monopoly status on Mr. Schaffer’s development. This is a suburban shopping center, nice looking, I’ll grant you, but too large for Valley Center.”
He urged getting a market owner like the owner of Major Market, to build a smaller market here. “I think if we all work together this can be one of America’s finest small towns.
Debra Hofler, owner of a veterinary office off Cole Grade, said, “I didn’t come whining to the planning board when I had to change my site plan.. We need to look at the community first and what do we want our community to be? We have to look at what do we want for Vc, not do we not want to step on the developer’s toes?”
Susan Glavinic complained that the arguments pro and con often degenerate into “name calling and attempts to smear people’s integrity. . . If the only way to make a point is to attack someone, there’s something wrong with their argument."
One of the fun entertainments at Western Days will be Karaoke with Nicole, scheduled for Sunday, 10 a.m. – 4 p.m.
Nicole Farrell was born in Quebec, Canada and moved to the US in the 60s.
She is the tenth child of a family of 17. Farrell started her own karaoke business in the early 90’s. Her first engagement, which lasted almost two years, was at Fat Ivor’s in Valley Center.
To this day Farrell still mentions how grateful she was to have been given that break from Tommy & Georgie and the support of the Valley Center Community.
Many locals still go to Nicole’s show at The Comstock Bar and Grill in Escondido. She has been there for over eight years now.
Farrell worked for Hollywood Palace downtown San Diego promoting the film Duets and the remake of the movie Grease. She also did the employee’s party for Legoland in 2002.
Some of her other activities include entertaining at nursing homes and senior centers on a regular basis, and numerous Christmas parties, weddings, anniversaries and birthday parties.
She has received numerous karaoke awards over the years. On April 18 of this year Farrell received the Favorite Karaoke Hostess and Favorite Karaoke Show Awards at the Music Award Show at Sycuan Casino.
The Valley Roadrunner
P.O.B. 1529, Valley Center, CA 92082
Tel. 760.749.1112 Fax 760.749.1688
Website: www.valleycenter.com
Email: editor@valleycenter.com
Copyright © 2002, Palomar Community Newspapers, dba Valley Roadrunner. All rights reserved. This content may not be archived, retransmitted, saved in a database, or used for any commercial purpose without the express written permission of the Valley Roadrunner.