For Planning Boards

The Peter Navarro press conference, reported in your paper of Sept. 29 (“Slow-Growthers Want Planning Panels Purged”), gives an unbalanced view of local planning boards. I would like to relate my experience on the Rancho Bernardo Planning Board during 1984-1985, when the issue of a proposed land-use change for the La Jolla Valley Project was brought before our community planning board.

The owners of that large tract of land proposed a massive development requiring a change in the San Diego Growth Management Plan to accommodate their scheme. The plan was presented to our board as the closest neighborhood planning board to the project. The owners had hired Louis Wolfsheimer as their attorney and Rick Engineering Co. as their engineer to present their proposal. Their case for early development included establishing a college with connections to an established religious group. Their pitch included demonstrations by sign-carrying advocates connected to the proposed educational institution. The case was politically powerful and emotionally charged.

The first vote on this matter by the R.B. Planning Board was overwhelmingly in favor of the development. Only three negative votes were counted, one by the undersigned, one by Mr. Gary Kreitzer and one by the current planning board chairman, Mr. Irv Rosen. When this matter again came before our planning board the initial approval vote was reversed. A highly financed La Jolla Valley Project was rejected by a local planning board.

I personally believe that this stand by the Rancho Bernardo Planning Board focused attention on overdevelopment in the North County to a greater degree than any other action by slow-growth advocates prior to that time.

There may now be an imbalance in local planning groups, but I think it should be noted that these groups have functioned to control growth in very meaningful and powerful ways.

WILLIAM G. HAGEN

San Diego