Challenges likely for Encinitas park plan
ENCINITAS —- City officials last week said they are determined to launch
construction at the Hall property park site this year, but worry that litigation
could delay a groundbreaking.

ENCINITAS —- City officials last week said they are determined to launch construction at the Hall property park site this year, but worry that litigation could delay a groundbreaking.

“Does the city have the intention of turning a spade of dirt on that site in 2007?” Councilman Jerome Stocks asked rhetorically in an interview. “The answer is unequivocally yes. Will we be allowed to? I don’t know.”

The uncertainty comes as critics of the park’s development plan review a newly released document that details the impact on the environment. They say they are already finding flaws.

Among the critics is Dietmar Rothe, a founding member of the neighborhood group Citizens for Quality of Life. Rothe said he is sure that he and others will continue the opposition that began with a lawsuit after the city bought the property in 2001 for $17.4 million.

As a result of that lawsuit, Superior Court Judge Michael M. Anello in 2003 ordered Encinitas to commission the environmental report that is now being reviewed.

“Certainly, there will be a lot of objections mailed into the city,” Rothe said.

Councilman Dan Dalager, in turn, referred to the litigants as “pernicious complainers” whose challenges come “at the expense of the families and the normal people who just want to take care of their families and need a place for the kids to go.”

“We’ll go through that six-month (response) period and they’ll turn around and sue us,” Dalager said. “It’s just a given.”

Park supporters, including some City Council members, say the city’s largest park would be a showpiece and would relieve the enormous demand that sports leagues place on overused ball fields.

The environmental study is posted on the city’s Web site and the public may submit written comments through March 12. The public also can address the study’s findings at a March 1 Planning Commission meeting.

Depending on the number and complexity of the comments —- the city must respond to all of them —- officials hope to publish a final environmental document for the city’s certification in the late spring or summer.

Traffic, noise, toxins

Released last month after more than two years of preparation, at a cost of $300,000, the environmental report reveals what critics say they have worried about for years —- that the 43-acre park just west of Interstate 5 and south of Santa Fe Drive would overwhelm surrounding roads with traffic.

The report also finds that noise could be reduced effectively with sound walls and that toxins in the soil are not significant enough to pose a danger.

The review includes a public airing of possible environmental issues, including:

- Traffic delays on freeway ramps on Santa Fe and Birmingham drives. The city could not compensate for those delays because the freeway will likely be widened and is under the control of the state Department of Transportation.

Traffic would also congest intersections on Santa Fe and Villa Cardiff roads. The city could relieve some congestion by keeping MacKinnon Avenue open to two-way traffic once the park opens, the study states.

- Toxins discovered in soil samples were not high enough to endanger park users, but the city should control dust during construction, the report states. Soil storage at the site should be kept to a minimum and contaminated soil should be disposed of properly.

- Noise from a dog park could be reduced by building a 6-foot-tall sound wall near neighboring homes to the east.

- Loudspeakers from sports events could be a nuisance to neighbors, and the city should maintain its own sound system with preset volume levels. Sports groups would lease the system.

- Glare from field lighting could be controlled by focusing the lights directly on the turf and shrouding the lamps with glare shields.

Something for everyone

The full park plan, estimated at $35 million but cut into phases because of cost, includes what officials say is something for everyone: baseball and softball fields, a skate park, teen center amphitheater, swimming pool and basketball courts.

Last month, City Council members agreed that launching a first phase of park construction is their top priority for this year. Lawns, landscaping, a dog park and picnic areas would be included in phase one, at an estimated cost of $19 million. The city sold bonds last year to pay for the work.

The city has not approved a name for the park. For now, the site is commonly known as the Hall property, in reference to Robert Hall, the nursery owner who sold the land to the city.

Some of the tumbled-down buildings from Hall’s operations remain. The city cannot remove them until the environmental review is complete, officials say.

A litigious history

City officials and activists last week said they were reviewing the environmental document.

Everett DeLano, the attorney representing Citizens for Quality of Life, said that alternative park plans explored in the report “are set up to fail.”

That’s because, he said, the alternatives don’t meet the city’s objectives, which are namely to outfit a sports park with the maximum number of athletic fields and other facilities. The objectives call for providing “adequate recreational facilities for all user groups” and for maximizing their use.

The citizens group backs a park with a pond and gardens that is less geared for sports.

“This is the city’s document,” DeLano said. “They get to decide how to structure this thing, and when you structure the city’s objectives with the alternative (park plans), the two will never meet. The document is flawed in that it doesn’t produce alternatives that meet most of the objectives.”

Council defends report

Some City Council members, however, defended the document as a thorough examination of the park’s possible environmental consequences.

“We went way out of our way to answer questions that didn’t even need to be asked in the first place,” Dalager said of the analysis.

“As far as I can tell,” added Councilman Stocks, “the city has done an extraordinarily thorough, extraordinarily high-level (report).

Mayor James Bond said he had not read the report, but had been briefed by city staffers.

Councilwoman Maggie Houlihan was on vacation last week and could not be contacted for comment.

Teresa Barth, the council’s newest member, agreed that the consultant, San Diego-based EDAW, Inc., prepared a thorough report.

“I’m very curious to know how the community is going to react to some of these (issues), with traffic being number one,” Barth said. We have a pretty diverse and educated community. They might come up with some brilliant ideas. I’m hoping to hear from them.”