Saturday, May 15, 2010

Hall Park: Giving Notice

The Hall park development creeps forward.

From Malory:


The city put this small notice up in areas that are not very visible, but does provide legal posting.
It would seem that a radical change, such as this, that will negatively effect so many property owners any where near the proposed Sports Park, should publicize this proposed change in the general plan more reasonably.
As I recall, since the lighting plan is not available on the City web site, this plan would include a massive lighting program with varied light standards up to 90 feet high, operating possibly till 9pm.

Excerpt from the Hall E.I.R.

ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

There are various issues regarding the development and design of the Hall Property Community Park

project that need to be resolved by the decision-making body. One issue that requires resolution is

the option to have night lighting of the athletic fields. This is an area of controversy among the

Encinitas community. The use of athletic field lighting is analyzed in this EIR. One project alternative

is the development of the park without the athletic field lighting. The City Council will decide whether

to adopt the project with athletic field lighting. If the project were to be adopted with athletic field

lighting, the City would also be required to approve a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Plan

Amendment, and Zoning Amendment to allow the light poles to be installed as they would exceed the

current regulatory height restrictions.

50 comments:

  1. For sale.... House on Rubenstein... cheap.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There are now two lighted sports fields within a mile of the proposed Hall Sports Park. One with two fields. The environmental Impact Report on the project clearly states that the requirements of sports fields is one field per thousand residents within one mile. That would be about seven fields in the entire city. Now, it is proposed eight fields, all lighted within one mile of each other. This will change the quality of life for the residents of Cardiff By The Sea, negatively.
    Hundreds of homes will have their ocean views obstructed by these hundreds of lights. And when all three fields are lighted at the same time, you will be able to see them from space.
    The Planning Commission, A City funded survey, the majority of public comments, neighbors and two council members all agreed that the current plan is not what the public wants. At present, the wishes of the above have been ignored and efforts to compromise have been ignored. As well as traffic issues, such as the F grade, (EIR report), of one of the main entrances, a narrow two lane road with parking on one side.
    The empathetic response to the citizens in the neighborhood from their council members has been comments like, “We will do whatever we want.” , “ Left field is enough of a buffer zone” and “If we don’t build more soccer fields, we will have to build more jails”
    The majority on council have gotten their way, disregarding any other opinions. It is not fair, or within the guideline of the general plan to implement this intrusion. At all of the General Plan workshops, there are citizen that desire a dark sky ordinance, like the Olivenhain area of the city.
    This is not fair to Cardiff.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well said, carcadian.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Blog #2, please refer to Blog #1. I live in Cardiff and you don't represent me. Move on!

    My family and I are looking forward to the new park.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Carcardian-

    Better sell your home and quick. I heard properties that are surrounding that sports complex are dropping 10% a month. Sorry to hear it, but thats what happens when Citizens elect politicians that are focused on special interests instead of residents interest.

    The best thing that cardiff could do to manage this sports complex correctly is to nix Dalager in the next election. The Regional Sport Complex with massive lights has been his whole focus the entire time on council.

    The best thing you have going for you regarding this complex is the Council needs to spend all of our tax money on Huge Pensions for phil Cotton and the boys, so there is no money for projects such as parks, beaches, and landscaping.

    Again, the pensions are the biggest issue for the City, yet the knucklehead refuse to even address the issue.

    All of them are fools, with the exception of Barth.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear 8:38
    You, individually, may want the sports park as it is designed, but you can not deny the facts of how this dividing issue has and is being handled and who's wishes have been ignored, or the traffic safety and quality of life consequences that have been ignored.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Barth is the only councilperson I know that wasted 15K on city legal fees for NOTHING!

    ReplyDelete
  8. trow da bums outMay 15, 2010 10:37 AM

    anon8:39- you are right on the money, with the exception of Barth. She is a fool also, trow da bums out!! Everyone of them, NOW!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Barth did not hire and direct the outside law firm to spend all that money. Glenn Sabine and Phil Cotton did so. Quit lying and watch the meeting. I did.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Or, in reality Stocks cost the city this money.
    It would not have gotten to this point if Stocks had not publicized it in the envelope waving theatrics and the city not hiring outside opinions. It was Theresa and Maggie that wanted to agendize a method of dealing with disputes among the council. This proposal was rejected by The Boys.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Stocks and cotton wasted this $15k and much more. 15k is pocket change in compassion to the millions give away by the 40% increase in pension payments in 2005 voted in by Dalager, Stocks and Houlihan. Losers all of them. They must really hate Encinitas to do that to our City.

    ReplyDelete
  12. dalager, stocks and co. wasted 100k on the FIRST hall park legal battle. Never forget that they tried cheat, got called out, had to pay legal fees to the NIMBYs who turned around and used the taxpayer's money to mount the second legal challenge.

    Where is the call for Dalager to return the 100k to the taxpayers?

    ReplyDelete
  13. dripping w sarcasmMay 15, 2010 1:15 PM

    Waaaa,waaaa. they are going to buld a park near my home.. a park where I can walk with my children and dogs. a park where flowers will grow and people will say "howdy neighbor". a park with green grass and sunshine.

    Oh heaven forbid they build such a park, it will be just awful. Oh the inhumanity of it all.

    ReplyDelete
  14. A park with noise that will make I5 freeway noise sound like a calm ocean breaze compared to the roar of obsenities shouted throughout the day.

    A park that will light up the whole neighborhood each night and make Cardiff into a sports league town.

    A park that will inidate the whole area with parking gridlock from all the rude Carlsbad fakees that wish they lived in Cardiff.

    Yeah. I am sure glad they are building that real neighborhood asset in Cardiff and not Leucadia.

    Finally, another town besides Leucadia gets a huge shit on by Council. Our coastal areas really need to get together and out the nightmare called Dan Dalager. With Dalagers attitude he fits in much better with Carlsbad interest than Encintas. Is there any chance we could get him to move to Carlsbad?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't believe that anyone does not want a park.
    I do believe that a park design that is so large and with 90' lights that causes unmitigated traffic safety issues to the surrounding established neighborhoods is the reason that there is logical concerns.
    The sarcastic wa wa guy is not acknowledging the issues and resonable concerns, or the topic of radical changes without resonable notice to those that will be affected by these changes forever.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Last election I reviewed campaign donations and addresses. There were no more than several notable donations to non-development candidates from people living near the park. There were candidates supporting a scaled down Hall park, and yet they were underfunded. Hall park neighborhood - the time is now to remove Dan and the 3-2 majority in favor of a sports park for the few. I hope you put in the money.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Please build the park. Our kids have left the nest during the almost one decade long park battles, but hopefully some other kids can benefit from the park for which we have been paying our taxes.

    But don't stop with the park. Address the traffic in the surrounding area (eg Santa Fe Dr, which will bear the brunt of both the park and the expanded Scripps hospital traffic). Make it possible for those of us living near the park to safely walk or ride our bikes to bypass the traffic jams that will ensue.

    Cardiff is not just those "by the Sea", and many of us in Cardiff would like to finally see the park built.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon2:28- You hit the nail on the head. This is all about money. And the campaign contributions that go along with money.

    If you don't want a park then someone had better run for council and those opposed to the is park had better fund that campaign mightily.

    ReplyDelete
  19. If you make another election about the park we will have Dalager stocks and bonds again.

    The majority of Encinitas wants a park and only Dalager is willing to give the people what they want. Dalager Stocks and Bonds all ran on the park issue in past elections and kicked ass. Dalager's ONLY issue is the park.

    YOU LOST THE PARK BATTLE and gave the the city to the developers along the way.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Council WatcherMay 15, 2010 4:19 PM

    Speaking of money...the city has $9million set aside for the park. Estimated cost is over $13M.

    Where is the rest of the money coming from? More debt? Another legacy to leave the kids?

    Let's not forget that the sports leagues don't pay to use the fields but all other groups pay to use city facilities.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 3:31 is correct.
    It is not wise to have this an issue in November. Anyone that is not 100% for the plan will be painted as 'against kids', like the last election.
    The over 200 lights on 90 foot poles is the issue now.
    It is fair for all those that are going to be effected
    by this to be given notice that the city wants to change the general plan in this manner.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I am sure the time will come when a plan will hatch to divert funds from Leucadia Streetscape to the Sports Park.
    We can't let that occur.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I agree with Carcadian! Very well said! The lights are absolutely ridiculous and I had no idea that this was going on. I live on the west side in cardiff and think that this would be extremely detrimental to our neighborhood. I dont' understand how this could happen and want to know how I can help stop this!!

    ReplyDelete
  24. As a community, we have to fight this project whole heartidly!!! The multitiude of 90 foot flood lights that will be put all over this plot of land will be a huge eye sore and beam through our windows, goodbye cozy and quite neighborhood! The plan that exists now goes against Environmental Impact Reports and the wishes of Encinitas residents at large. If any of you care about our community, PLEASE act now to reverse the trajectory that this asinine project has taken on!! If any of you research this project, you will see that the needs and wants of encinitas,cardiff residents have been overlooked and/or completly ingnored. If this project is completed in the current manner, you all will be very sorry and regret not getting involved. This will forever change our beloved city!!!! :(

    ReplyDelete
  25. How bout a daytime park with no lights?

    Is that so wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  26. if you want to stop the lights going in, you have to stop the General Plan amendment. This Council and previous Councils have added amendments to the General Plan whenever a special favor is requested. The San Dieguito high school is one example. The General Plan restricts building heights, including lights, to 30 feet. The school officials wanted to go over 30 feet. The city council at that time just added a General Plan amendment that allowed the additional height for the school. Scripps Hospital wanted to increase building height. The city council added another General Plan amendment for the hospital.

    First, stop this General Plan amendment for the lights. Then make sure that the update on the General Plan takes away any power given to the Council to change the General Plan without a vote of the people.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Ever wonder why there are no permanent lights on the sports fields by the Encinitas Ranch Town Center?

    Many of the parks in Encinitas were designated as day use only parks. Oakcrest Part was one until the community/senior center was built.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Loving EnicinitasMay 15, 2010 9:27 PM

    If you want to stop 90 foot lights from lighting up Cardiff way more than the YMCA lights due to Encinitas/Leucadia the answer is simple.

    Donate money to candidates running for council that have all resident interests at heart. Ones that are not bought off by Carlsbad CEO Sports leagues. Put your money on Tony Krantz (sp?). that guy knows sports and believes in all Encinitas interest. He is not bought off and will not be. He is the the salt of the earth.

    Put your money and your time to something that will make a difference. This time Tony. Next election I say lets get Dr. Lorri on Council. Then we will have a council that is good for Encinitas. There are tons of smart Encinitas citizens that don’t want to be career politicians that will do the interest of our town very well. We will not have it all about funding the excess pensions of employees.

    I am going to donate $600 towards this campaign. I am taxed out an not able to donate more. I wish I could donate more. I hope you can. Step up. Now is the time to offset Meyers and Mick Peterson, and Jerome Stocks who controls Danny Dalager. That right Danny is the lap dog to Jerome. I have so many examples of Danny the lap dog that it would make you sick.

    The time is now. Step up and donate to a candidate that will help Teresa and all of us make Encinitas Great. Step up and contribute to Tony Krantz's campaign.

    Warmly,

    Loving Encinitas

    ReplyDelete
  29. wc varones,

    Making suggestions like that is political suicide. You don't know it but you are now classified as a child hating, selfish, NIMBY.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Just curious - I wonder if everyone here against the Park would be open to more debate had they "won" the battle, and there was either no park at all, or a scaled down park?

    Do you all think that you would be open to keep debating and would you accept that eveyone has different agendas/opinions?

    Or would you say "the decision is made, let's move forward"?

    ReplyDelete
  31. 837,

    You provide a good pivot for introspection and I hope folks will think about it. I think a good analogue for this blog is the streetscape. The decision has been made; should we redo the decision every 9/12 months to affirm and keep the debate going?

    To 837, Is it reasonable to look retrospectively at decisions of our elected officials and debate the quality of the decision making for the purpose of evaluating officials and the process (not with the intent to change the decision? )

    ReplyDelete
  32. The problem with the park really lies in just a couple of issues. The main one, as I see it, is how hundreds of cars going to get into the park? Have any of you actually gone over there and looked at the access into the park? There is very little access. The City was relying on CalTrans to help out, but there is no money for that. So, the options are limited, as to even driving into the park. Couple that with night sports, which translates into more usage, then you have a problem. Scripps expansion does not help either. Although I am personally in favor of adding to the hospital. The Park can be beautiful and user friendly. Even sports fields are not the problem, if they are used for local kids. The problem that has not seemed to be worked out, at least from my perspective, is the traffic. I don't think the City has done their homework on this, or perhaps I should say it has done their homework but seem to be ignoring the facts of getting in and out of the Park.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Elections have consequences. We have an opportunity to trade a sports league pandering Dan in for someone who will make accomodation for all. If everyone on this blog put in $200 or more into the right candidates and hosted coffees and went door to door with flyers, I bet we could have a council with a view of addressing our concerns.

    Complaining here is a good way to share views, but it's the hard work in August, September, and October that will make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Backing candidates who will reopen the hall park DECISION will have consequences. You will lose and Dalager will get exactly what will serve him best. Another election about a park.

    The last election was your chance to make an effort and the people of encinitas voted against you.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The General Plan Amendment will take a super majority of the council (4 votes) or approval by a public vote. There are only three votes right now. Both Barth and Houlihan voted against the park plan that was rejected by the Planning Commission and appealed. The final approval of the park plan was also 3 to 2. The 3-man majority will never risked a public vote.

    Stocks and Dalager are already making this an election issue. What do you think all the nastiness at city hall against the two lades is all about? Dalager's reelection is already at risk because of his job performance.

    Stocks and Dalager are trying to rally the troops. It's a difficult task because there is no money to build the park. Budget projections show NO money for park construction. Dalager will try to explain this to the public by showing they are moving ahead with with the GP amendment. Yet there is no legality that is holding up park construction.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Hello there,
    A couple of points:

    This is about changing the general plan and Coastal Commission approval for lights.

    Teresa and Maggie never voted against the park.
    They voted to acknowledge and support the recommendations of the Planning Commission.
    Their recommdations were to reduce the fields by one or two and mitagate the traffic issues that were brought up in the EIR and public input. They were the ones that had the task of hearing two days of public testimony, review over 1500 pages of the EIR, read all of the emails and letters from the citizens of Encinitas and try to make some sense of it all. It was Park & Rec dept, (who put in the direction to "maximize the sports fields without any athority and is headed by the pres of the soccer leagues)that challenged the recommendations of the only entity that actually
    reviewed all the facts and input. Stocks, Bond and Dalleger
    were the ones that voted against the Planning Commission.
    I do believe everyone wants a park.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Build the People's Park could be an election theme. Dalager's should be blamed for not getting the park done. If he had followed the rules, the park would already been under construction. Take away his campaign "strength." Highlight is cronyism, financial mismanagement and use the park as an example. Dalager = #FAIL

    ReplyDelete
  38. Look what we have here, more adolescent whining from the Cardiff crowd.

    What a bunch of Negative Nancys!

    If you don't want a park, then say so. Don't give me this garbage..."I just want a scaled down park!" No you don't. You don't want a park at all.

    Why do I say this? Because if (like Cardiff residents want) we redo the plans and waste even more money, they will still oppose the project!

    Let's face it, they don't want anything there.

    That's fine. I say let them eat their words and put up a nice, huge, awful tract development right there. Just crowd that entire lot with 3,000 sqft homes on 5,000 sqft lots.

    I wonder what they would say then. I'm glad this is going forward...even though some will STILL complain and file lawsuits. They've had their say, they lost, too bad...end of story.

    Keep in mind my friends...that these are the SAME people who don't want to expand Scripps! Let's see: They don't want a park for the kids to play in and they don't want to modernize the only hospital along the north county coastal region.

    What a bunch of sore, bitter losers!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anon:1:39- I am always amused when someone posts anonymously something they seem to know nothing about. As a 25 plus year resident of Cardiff, I am thrilled to have a park at the old Hall property. So, I guess I must be the only one in Cardiff that is not a "negative Nancy". However, if you knew anything about this whole fiasco, you might not be so quick to point a finger at Cardiffians. (Although, I am actually quite sure you do know about the whole thing.) Cardiff has been waiting for over 7 years for a Cardiff Specific Plan, which somehow cannot seem to get past the Council, no matter how much we give in to every single ridiculous demand made my the City. Even Leucadia, who started after we did, has a plan. The Park did not originally have 5 lit sports parks. The City wasted taxpayer money by not doing a correct EIR to begin with. This cost the citizens a lot of money. Would you want your kids to be playing soccer on contaminated dirt? I know I wouldn't. In the beginning there was no mention of 90 foot lights. In the beginning there was no mention of it being a sport park, but a park for all to enjoy. I could go on, but I have a feeling it wold fall on deaf ears. If you are not Jerome or Dan, or one of their friends, please read how the whole thing happened before passing judgement on the good people of Cardiff. We are dealing with the expansion of Scripps and the traffic it will cause. And, if you have ever been over to the Hall property you might see it as one big traffic nightmare, which, from the best I can tell, has not been dealt with at all by the CIty,
    P.S. Have the guts to publish your own real name when trashing others. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  40. My problem is that it is NIMBY issue. My parents are doctors and let's just say that I have been on Devonshire road. All those people opposed expanding Scripps because, god forbid, we upgrade our hospital.

    The people in Cardiff just want to stall, delay and basically keep this thing perpetually in limbo.

    And please, don't tell me you're that worried about you're THAT concerned about doing an EIR. The only reason why they want that done is to delay the project.

    When people don't want something going in their neighborhood, they file baseless lawsuits and file more and more and more until the city (or whoever) gives up.

    Well, the city is not going to give up and there will be a park there whether you like it or not.

    And my bitterness towards that whole area started with the hospital expansion. They didn't want an upgraded hospital because that would make their lives just SO much harder.

    That's the reason why I am very, very suspicious of the opposition to the park. It's the same old garbage being thrown around by the same people. The only difference is that it's a new project.

    As for a specific plan for Cardiff...in case you haven't noticed Leucadia (where I grew up) does not look nearly as good as Cardiff. Yet you complain that they don't have a specific plan. Cardiff looks great to me, their downtown is fantastic, the views are great and it's one of my favorite parts of Encinitas.

    You can go on and on about how it's so terrible.

    People in Cardiff are just going to have to deal with it. They have already wasted an obscene amount of money delaying this project becasue, god forbid, we have kids playing soccer next door.

    Let me ask you this: Do you support the expansion of the hospital?

    Probably not. It's not like the people on Devonshire don't have any noise. They are right by the freeway and across from the hospital..c'mon.

    I see a connection between the two. What's that connection? NIMBY whiners, who make up a minority of Cardiff residents.

    They are pretty vocal though.

    Sincerely,

    Joe Varney

    And btw, I did vote for Barth & Maggie.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I heard that some people who bought (relatively) new houses next to the Hall property had to sign documents saying that they understood there was going to be a public park next door. Now these same people are protesting the park. That sounds like NIMBY behavior to me.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I agree with you 100%.

    See Dr. Lori, I'm not the only one!

    ReplyDelete
  43. I agree with you 100%.

    See Dr. Lori, I'm not the only one!

    ReplyDelete
  44. I am not sure what "See Dr Lori I am not the only one means" but whatever. At least please spell my name correctly, and put yours on your post. Seems like you could at least do that as along as you are posting whatever you are posting.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Look at post above yours:

    I heard that some people who bought (relatively) new houses next to the Hall property had to sign documents saying that they understood there was going to be a public park next door. Now these same people are protesting the park. That sounds like NIMBY behavior to me.

    May 20, 2010 9:17 PM




    I am not the only one who disagrees with your twisted, psychotic view.

    ReplyDelete
  46. All those who say ANYONE does not want a park is TOTALLY wrong. There is absolutly no evidence of this. The concerns of citizens revolves around wanting a Community Park for all, with playing fields available to all, amenities for all, not just those that are in organized Leagues.
    The Hall EIR clearly states the city's requirement for fields is one field per 1000 residents within one mile. That would be 6.7 fields. there are 16 fields that the soccer leagues play on now. the general public will not be able to reserve a field, even when required to have to pay and the sports leagues play for free.
    the current proposal would have EIGHT LIGHTED fields within one mile of each other. The Planning Commission, SANDAG, the only city funded survey of it's citizens,survey at Encinitas Days, the majority of public recorded comments and two council members all agree that this plan should be scaled back. One of the main enterences to the park received a grade of F and will have no mitagation.
    You can say anything, but this is all true.
    Everyone wants a park.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Why don't you just file another lawsuit? You should sue the city and waste even more money. The people of Encinitas sure would love to spend their tax dollars on a small handful of NIMBYS....who were okay with a park going in anyway!

    File a lawsuit...you'll win this time! If we had a vote in Encinitas on this issue, I sincerely doubt people would be very sympathetic to your cause....if at all!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Only Caradians should vote on the park.

    ReplyDelete
  49. It there were a vote, that many wanted, we would have a community park for all, not just a Sports Park for special interest and we would have a park built by now.
    The law suit, you seem to refer to was to do an EIR on land that had been greenhouses for decades. The city should have responsibly done this. They did not. The suit was to have this done and the people won the lawsuit. It determined the the land is contaminated and still is. Is is too dangerous to build housing on the land, but ok for a park.
    The reason that we are not using the park now is because our leadership would not work with opposing parties and that is what has held development.
    The majority of recorded public comments, SANDAG, a city funded survey, the Planning Commission, and two council members all believe that the park should be scaled down.
    For anyone to say this is a NIMBY issues is missinformed.
    Everyone wants a park.
    And we would have had a park now if the wishes of the citizens were acknowledged.
    This has been a huge drain of time and a huge amount of money caused by an un yeilding , obstinent, self serving, uncompromising mentality.
    What a waste. The reason we have no park now is because of this mentality.

    ReplyDelete
  50. There isn't going to be a park. There isn't any money for a park. The city can't pay the bills it has now, let alone take on more.

    We are in the beginning years of the greatest depression of them all. Our politicians have screwed us and you better be ready for things to get worse, much worse.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.