Council OKs Construction Projects With 7,378 Homes

The San Diego City Council, confident that voters firmly rejected home-building caps in their Election Day defeats of two slow-growth propositions, Monday approved four contracts governing the construction of 7,378 houses in Mission Valley and the city’s northern tier.

Approval of the “development agreements” will bring the city $24 million in cash from developers and $36 million in early construction of schools, parks, roads and other public facilities. Included in that bonanza are $6.2 million and 100 acres of right of way toward construction of California 56 from North City West to Rancho Penasquitos, and the track and right of way for the planned Mission Valley trolley line.

In return, the city granted the developers a guaranteed right to build the homes over an extended period, in one case into the next century.

Had Delayed Action

The quick, nearly unanimous approval of the agreements came in the wake of the Nov. 8 defeat of slow growth Propositions H and J, both of which would have placed annual caps on residential construction and enacted protections for some of the city’s unique topography.

The council had delayed action on the agreements until after the election to keep the contest free of the appearance of pre-election deals for developers. However, Mayor Maureen O’Connor had repeatedly assured the developers that she felt a “moral obligation” to their projects, which had been delayed as long as two years while the city devised a policy on development agreements.

“We are here to uphold the law, and the law right now is (voters) don’t want the (home-building) limit,” O’Connor said. “ . . . For us to continue to say ‘no’ because we’re unhappy, I think that is severe and unusual punishment, and I’m not going to do that.”

In a separate action, the council delayed consideration of agreements covering nine more projects, seven of which would be built in the Scripps Ranch and Miramar Ranch North communities. Although those projects have been delayed as well, some may prove controversial because of considerable grading of hillsides and filling of canyons that would be needed to build homes.

Monday’s approvals drew little debate from council members and almost plaintive opposition from chastened slow-growth activists who, in the past, had lodged vigorous protests about large residential projects.

Four of the city’s environmental and slow-growth leaders did appear in the council chambers to ask that the approvals be delayed until the council determines whether it will enact the long-term environmental protections that had been part of both slow-growth propositions.

Debate on New Measures

Temporary environmental restrictions and caps on home building expire Feb. 21, and the council has pledged to begin considering new growth-control measures at a workshop scheduled for Nov. 30.

That effort may have been hampered by a decision Monday by county Registrar of Voters Connie McCormack, who told the council that her office cannot review ballots to determine how many voters rejected both slow-growth ballot propositions. Reasoning that growth-control votes may have been split between the two measures, the council had asked for the review to gauge the true depth of support for slow-growth measures.

But Assistant Registrar of Voters Keith Boyer said Monday that state law calls for ballots to be sealed when the registrar’s canvass is completed Nov. 21. They may not be unsealed or reviewed except for a challenge or a recount.

The Sierra Club’s Linda Michael, noting last week’s passage of an advisory measure that calls for a regional approach to development planning, told the council that “now is still not the time for the City Council to approve development agreements. In the city and the region, it is the time to take stock of the November election and to begin to work together again.”

But Councilman Ed Struiksma, whose council district will be home to three of the projects, told his colleagues that “one has to eventually get to the point where one says enough is enough, and let’s set about the business of providing public facilities.”

Three of the four projects were approved by unanimous 7-0 votes of the council, with Councilmen Bruce Henderson and Bob Filner absent. Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer cast the lone dissenting vote on one project, Westview/Casa Mira View in Mira Mesa.

The four projects approved are:

* RiverWalk, a 200-acre Mission Valley development that will include 1,329 homes built by 2004. The meandering development between Friars Road and Hotel Circle North, west of Fashion Valley Road, will include commercial space and a 51-acre riverside park.

* Mercy Mira Mesa, a 655-home development on 368 acres between Black Mountain Road and Interstate 15, to be built by 1991. The project requires a second approval by the council, which is considered automatic.

* Westview/Casa Mira View, a 260-acre development on the east and west sides of Black Mountain Road, between Los Penasquitos Canyon and Mira Mesa Boulevard. Plans call for construction of 3,712 homes by 1997.

* A 480-acre project on two locations in the Penasquitos East community. Plans call for construction of 1,682 homes by 1991.