(Published July 8, 2016)

Lake Elsinore resident Dana Mark Coon has received approval to begin the initiative process in an attempt to have the massive Alberhill Villages project placed on the November ballot, 

The 8,244-home Alberhill Villages Specific Plan, approved by the City Council in June, had several city-imposed conditions that developer Castle & Cooke opposes and would prefer that the project’s future be decided by city voters.

Coon in March had approached the city seeking the necessary paperwork to begin the signature-gathering process to place the initiative on the ballot. After reviewing the 263-page initiative, Coon’s request was denied by City Attorney Barbara Liebold.

Coon approached the city again on June 10, submitting a revised initiative that addressed the concerns of constitutionality raised earlier by Liebold.

Liebold on June 27 issued the necessary paperwork that allows Coon to begin gathering signatures in an attempt to qualify the initiative for the November ballot.

If the required number of signatures is obtained and voters approve the project, Liebold has said the vote would probably supersede the city’s approval.

RELATED PRESS-ENTERPRISE REPORT:
June 28, 2016: Alberhill supporters cleared to gather signatures

 

Mega project OK’d with mega conditions

(Published June 15, 2016)

The Lake Elsinore City Council, against the wishes of developer Castle & Cooke, has approved the 8,244-home Alberhill Villages Specific Plan.

Castle & Cooke attorney Stephen Miles told City Council members, “This is not the developer’s specific plan. This is the city’s specific plan,” referring to the city-imposed conditions placed on the plan after it was presented to the city’s Planning Commission in February.

Since then, Castle & Cooke is seeking an initiative that would allow voter approval of the project, circumventing the city conditions which the developer has said would make the plan “unbuildable.” (Read more about the initiative below.)

The main areas of disagreement include:

• The almost 46-acre, multi-million-dollar sports park – The developer will give the city the land but wants the city to construct it; the city wants the developer to build it.
• Mining setbacks – Current M-3 (mining), zoning on the property allows for homes to be built 300 feet from mining operations. The city changed it to 1,000 feet and at the meeting changed it again to 1,500 feet.
• M-3 zoning – Because of this zoning, if the developer wasn’t able to entice the retail/commercial businesses nor the hospital or university to the development, the M-3 zoning would allow for heavy industrial uses.
• Traffic studies – A traffic impact analysis will be required for each of the phases as they are developed. Six phases are anticipated over 30 years. Riverside County submitted a letter supporting this requirement because of possible impact to Temescal Valley along Temescal Canyon Road. The county requested that the traffic studies include all of Temescal Canyon Road north to Indian Truck Trail.
• Public safety – The city wants a community facility district (CFD), created to cover the cost of police and fire services. Alberhill Villages home and property owners would pay the tax annually on their property tax bills. The developer maintains that the CFD isn’t necessary because of the several million dollars in sales tax they say will be generated by the project.

Additionally, the city wants the 1,400-acre project reduced to 1,375 acres to create open space buffer areas. The acreage of the wildlife corridor near the Temescal Wash and Temescal Canyon Road would be increased. Also, 220 homes have been removed from the project to provide more open space between Horsethief Canyon Ranch and the Alberhill Villages boundary.

Castle & Cooke can accept the approval of the plan as conditioned by the city or continue its attempt to place an initiative on the ballot for voter approval.

RELATED PRESS-ENTERPRISE REPORT:
June 15, 2016: Plan for 8,000-home project wins council nod, despite developer’s objections

City, developer battle over how project is to be approved

(Published June 10, 2016)

Much has transpired since the Lake Elsinore Planning Commission in February voted to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan.

In addition to the proposed 8,244 homes, the 1,400-acre project includes plans for a four-year university, medical facilities, a new public school, shopping, dining and entertainment, plus parks, trails and two lakes encompassing about 50 acres. It is estimated that the project will be built in six phases over 30 years, serving as the reclamation process for the Pacific Clay mining operation as it is phased out.

Alberhill Villages would be built adjacent to Horsethief Canyon Ranch between the Temescal Valley border and Lake Street.

Apparently, project developer Castle & Cooke doesn’t agree with the conditions the city has imposed on the project and, instead, wants city voters to decide its fate. After endorsement by the Planning Commission, Castle & Cooke asked the city to take no further action on the Specific Plan and its Environmental Impact Report.

Acting on behalf of Castle & Cooke, Lake Elsinore resident Dana Mark Coon in March approached the city seeking the necessary paperwork to begin the initiative process to launch a petition drive to have the project placed on the November ballot.

After reviewing the 263-page initiative, Coon’s request was denied by City Attorney Barbara Liebold, who then filed a complaint asking a Riverside County judge to stop the initiative process from going forward.

Liebold claims that the proposed Alberhill Villages initiative differs greatly from the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan that was reviewed by the Planning Commission in February. She views the initiative as unconstitutional and that it “unfairly benefits Castle & Cooke and shifts the costs of the proposed development to the Lake Elsinore taxpayers.” Additionally, if voters were to approve the ballot measure, the City Council would have little say on how the project is developed over the next 30 years.

A series of court actions has ensued since the city filed the complaint – lawsuits, appeals, counter lawsuits – with a California Supreme Court ruling on April 28 that denied Coon’s emergency request that the city prepare the necessary paperwork to begin the petition process of gathering signatures to qualify the initiative for a ballot vote.

The initial complaint filed by Liebold to determine the constitutionality of the initiative is yet to be decided, with the next court date scheduled July 27.

In the meantime, the city has ignored the request by Castle & Cooke to take no further action on the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan and scheduled a Tuesday, June 14 City Council public hearing on the project.

This latest action was addressed by Castle & Cooke attorney Stephen Miles in a letter delivered to the city on Friday, June 10. The letter cites unresolved issues that Castle & Cooke says were not addressed in the Specific Plan approved by the Planning Commission, including consideration of the Pacific Clay Development Agreement which was omitted from the plan. Also noted were the conditions added to the plan by city staff that Castle & Cooke finds “onerous.”

The correspondence by Miles concludes that Castle & Cooke and proponent Coon “remain fully committed to seeking voter support for Alberhill Villages.” The letter also “demands” that the city remove the project from the June 14 agenda or reschedule it for the July 26 City Council meeting.

Coon also approached the city again on June 10 re-seeking the necessary paperwork to begin the initiative petition process to put the project on the ballot and submitted a revised initiative that addresses the concerns of constitutionality raised by City Attorney Liebold.

As of June 12, the project remains on the City Council agenda for June 14. If the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan is approved by the council and Castle & Cooke is successful in the initiative process and Lake Elsinore voters approve the project, Liebold has said the vote would probably supersede the city’s approval.

RELATED PRESS-ENTERPRISE REPORTS:
March 9, 2016: Petition seeks vote on Alberhill Villages proposal
April 1, 2016: City sues to block petition
April 15, 2016: Judge says initiative petition can proceed
April 19, 2016: City appeals to stop Alberhill Villages petition
April 29, 2016: Justices deny initiative backers’ plea
June 8, 2016: Massive development plan gets hearing
June 10, 2016: New initiative filed on huge project

CITY PRESS RELEASES:
April 22, 2016: Why the city attorney challenged the Alberhill villages initiative
April 28, 2016: Supreme Court denies request by Alberhill Villages Proponent
June 3, 2016: City announces public hearing regarding Alberhill Villages

City planners support Alberhill Villages

(Published Feb. 19, 2016)

The Lake Elsinore Planning Commission voted Feb. 16 to recommend the approval of the 8,244-home Alberhill Villages development to its City Council.

City planners were told the 1,400-acre project, in addition to the homes, will feature a four-year university, medical facilities, a new public school, shopping, dining and entertainment, plus parks, trails and two lakes encompassing about 50 acres. Several Lake Elsinore residents spoke in favor of the project, citing the 5,500 new jobs and several million in sales tax dollars they say it will bring to the city and the increased opportunity to “shop local.”

It is estimated that the project will be built in six phases over 30 years, serving as the reclamation process for the Pacific Clay mining operation as it is phased out.

Twenty-four Temescal Valley residents submitted emailed comments opposing the project because of its location between Lake Street and the city’s boundary adjacent to Horsethief Canyon Ranch. The opposition was based on no foreseeable solutions to ease traffic on the I-15 and the findings of the project’s environmental impact report that states traffic and transportation impacts caused by the project cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. The 24 emails were entered into the public record and will be given to the City Council.

The project’s plans indicate that Lake Street will be widened to eight lanes at the freeway and Temescal Canyon Road within the city’s boundaries will be widened to six lanes.

Russell Williams, a development review manager with the Riverside County Transportation Department, spoke at the meeting asking that the city and applicant Castle & Cooke work with the county on a road improvement phasing plan that would provide appropriate improvements to Temescal Canyon Road. He said the improvements to Temescal Canyon Road, both within and outside of the project area, would be tied to individual phases of the project as it is constructed.

It was the recommendation of the Planning Commission to pass on the county’s request to the City Council.

The first phase of the project would include 1,300-plus dwelling units, the university – possibly a teaching hospital, retail and commercial, and a sports park. The next step in the approval process will be a public hearing before the Lake Elsinore City Council at a date yet to be determined.

RELATED PRESS-ENTERPRISE REPORT:
Feb. 17, 2016: Massive project wins panel’s support

Public comments due on mega-project

(Published on Feb. 13, 2016)

Report finds impacts on traffic and transportation to be unavoidable

Comments either for or against the 1,400-acre Alberhill Villages development are now being accepted by the city of Lake Elsinore prior to a public hearing for the project at the city’s Planning Commission meeting Tuesday, Feb. 16.

The project is located at the city’s northern boundary, north of Lake Street, and will be built just south of Horsethief Canyon Ranch.

Land owner Castle & Cooke wants to build 8,244 homes and devote an additional 4 million square feet to non-residential uses including a 6,000-student university. While many say it will take 20 to 30 years for build out, the project’s specific plan and draft environmental impact report (DEIR), could be approved by the city’s Planning Commission on Feb. 16, and ultimately receive final approval by the City Council.

With no timeline in place for improvements to the 1-15 south of Cajalco Road, Temescal Valley residents have voiced concern about the project’s impact on transportation and traffic.

The environmental impact report found that the development will have significant impacts that cannot be corrected. The DEIR “ … determined that, even with the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures, the project will have significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts related to Air Quality, Transportation, Traffic, and project-level impacts related to Noise, which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance.”

Comments should be emailed before Feb. 16 to Roy Stephenson, land use engineer, at rstephenson@hrgreen.com. For those wishing to comment at the public hearing, the meeting is at 6 p.m. at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 N. Main St.

MORE INFORMATION:
About the project
Specific Plan, EIR and related documents

RELATED PRESS-ENTERPRISE REPORTS:
Dec. 11, 2015: Developer drops lawsuit against city
Nov. 25, 2015: As planned, new community is largest in city