Lake Miramar Impasse : Citizens Group to Undertake New Ballot Initiative to Halt Development

A major builder and a citizens group attempting to agree on a compromise that would govern development of the picturesque hills north of Lake Miramar have reached an impasse, a circumstance that virtually guarantees another bitter ballot initiative campaign for control of the land.

The Save Miramar Lake Committee said Friday that it has little choice but to begin a second initiative campaign after a task force of community representatives Thursday night endorsed McMillin Communities’ revised plan for developing the hillsides.

“All they’ve done is make cosmetic changes, in our opinion, to the old plan,” said J. Gary Underwood, co-chairman of the citizens group. “You’re just looking at bigger boxes,” he added. “The same amount of acreage goes under the plow.”

In a surprising victory in April, the citizens group forced the City Council to scrap a “development agreement” with BCE Development calling for construction of 3,360 homes on 1,200 acres north of the lake known as Miramar Ranch North.

Qualified Initiative

With a small budget but a sizable volunteer force, the group--which opposed just 658 of the homes, an industrial park and a four-lane road slated for construction immediately north of the lake--qualified an initiative for the ballot calling for repeal of the development contract between the city and the developer.

In the process, they bested BCE, which spent $450,000 to collect signatures favoring the project and lost three court battles over the legality of the citizens group’s effort.

Scrapped Agreement

But rather than submit the initiative to the voters, the council scrapped the agreement at the request of Councilman Ed Struiksma, a longtime backer of the project who represents the district. The plan was sent to a task force nominated by Struiksma, a group that even some council members contended was stacked in favor of the developers.

In so doing, the council ensured that voters would not decide the referendum on the same day as they voted on Struiksma’s bid for a third term in this September’s election. Although the timing is difficult to predict, it is possible that the Miramar Ranch North project may not come back to the council before the Sept. 19 primary election in which Struiksma faces three opponents who already are criticizing him for a pro-development record.

Underwood said his group is considering endorsing Struiksma opponent Linda Bernhardt, who helped the group plot strategy in its early days.

Struiksma declined to comment Friday on the compromise offered by McMillin Communities, which has agreed to purchase the Miramar Ranch North site from BCE. The sale is still in escrow.

Must Review Plan

Noting that the Scripps Ranch and Miramar Ranch North planning groups must now review the new plan, Struiksma said, “I don’t think I want to try to influence the process at this moment.”

Steve McGill, senior vice president for McMillin Communities, said the new plan contains major concessions to the citizens group. They include building 205 fewer homes; adding 12 to 14 acres of open space; scrapping a city-approved plan for an industrial and office park at the western edge of the lake in favor of a smaller industrial park and single family homes; and moving a four-lane road farther from the lake.

The developer still will build a badly needed east-west route through Scripps Ranch, and the Mercy Road interchange with Interstate 15, McGill said. In addition, the company is willing to provide a library, parks and schools promised in the earlier development agreement.

2 Sides Far Apart

Nevertheless, the two sides are far apart. The Save Miramar Lake Committee wants virtually no building in the landscape north of the lake and is demanding that the four-lane road be routed behind a ridge, despite city engineers’ recommendation that such an alignment would be dangerous. Another alternative it presented called for the city to sell bonds to purchase the land as open space.

Claire Kaufman, a task force member who voted for the McMillin plan, said she sympathizes with Underwood’s aims, but criticized him for refusing to negotiate.

“There were never any real answers (from Underwood),” Kaufman said. “Rather than trying to work things out or trying to compromise, he would just stick to” alternatives he proposed, she said.

“If I could say that there would be absolutely no development up there, that’s what I would vote for,” Kaufman said. “But I don’t have that choice” because the land is privately owned, she added.

Plan Outlined

Though the initiative is not yet written, Underwood said he is considering a plan that would make it illegal to build near Lake Miramar, Lake Hodges and Lake Murray, the three reservoirs situated within the city limits, to protect views and water quality. An initiative aimed solely at Lake Miramar might be struck down by a court because it would target land owned by one developer, he said.

Struiksma, however, noted that much of the land surrounding Lake Murray and Lake Hodges is either developed or outside the city limits.

“It’s either an example of a not very well-thought-out plan or it’s just a backdoor approach to accomplishing something that they’ve been trying,” he said.

McGill said that McMillin Communities is prepared to mount an opposition campaign centered on the benefits the project would provide to Scripps Ranch residents.

“If that’s their initiative, I think they’re going to have not just McMillin Communities and BCE to contend with,” he said. “They’re starting to define a broader issue that affects others as well.”