Opinions expressed in Dialogue are strictly the author’s and do not reflect a position taken by the SRCA or the Newsletter. Submissions must be received by the monthly deadline; see the calendar on page 4 for dates. Limit articles to 300 words. Include the author’s name, address, and phone number. Articles submitted anonymously will not be published. However, the editorial staff may choose to publish an article and not reveal the writer’s name for safety or other reasons. Due to space limitations, not all submissions may be used. The editorial staff reserves the right to select and edit published articles.

Save Our Scripps Ranch Resurrected

An important issue facing our community is the Carroll Canyon Road project. A growing number of Scripps Ranch residents are expressing strong opposition to the city’s proposal to rezone the old PSA buildings at the corner of I-15 and Carroll Canyon Road. Rezoning this property from industrial (corporate business park) to commercial (big box retailer) will significantly increase traffic, severely degrade the Scripps Ranch quality of life, impact biological resources, and more. In light of those issues, residents are resurrecting a grassroots community group to strongly oppose the project.

The group, Save Our Scripps Ranch or SOS Ranch, was first started in 2000 to support the continuity of our community plan. SOS Ranch was instrumental in getting the Meanley Wall near the library designated as an official historic site.

As for the Carroll Canyon project, the city is developing the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which proposes to rezone the property on the corner of I-15 and Carroll Canyon Road from industrial to commercial. The rezoning is inconsistent with the Scripps Miramar Ranch community plan and the city’s general plan. It would create severe short- and long-term consequences to our community. The rezoning would:

  • Significantly increase traffic congestion—20+ minutes to access I-15
  • Promote chronic congestion on Carroll Canyon Road
  • Potentially increased crime rates
  • Impair the emergency evacuation plan
  • Substantially alter the existing character of Scripps Ranch
  • Remove 83 eucalyptus trees, potential great horned owl nesting sites
  • Restrict growth of new small businesses and threaten existing small businesses

We must join together as a community to understand the project proposal and its consequences to our neighborhood.

Then we need to take our opposition to the city Planning Commission and City Council hearings. SOS Ranch will hold a meeting in January to discuss the project and formulate a position to present to the Planning Commission and City Council. As of press time, the meeting information was not available. For the latest, please visit [www.sosranch.us]. Also, email us at [[email protected]] with any questions, comments, or concerns.

Jenny Marshall, SOS Ranch

Support for Carroll Canyon Road Project

I am writing in response to a letter from Wes Danskin in the December SRCA Newsletter [“Big Box Issue Unravels Scripps Ranch,” page 19; read it online at www.scrippsranch.org/dialogue]. Jack Samuelson and I developed the Scripps Ranch Business Park and remain owners and association managers.

I appreciate the remarks describing the development as “an aesthetically designed nationally recognized business park.” However, I take exception to the comment that the Horizon proposal “permanently changes one of the most quiescent entrances to our community into an asphalt-laden, noisy area like one of the places we choose not to live.”

The property is hardly bucolic today— containing obsolete, deteriorating, and unoccupied buildings for 15 years. Further, existing entitlements allow a 2-FAR, meaning an 800,000-square-foot office complex can be built. If the church’s proposal stalls, a development several hundred thousand square feet larger—with buildings over seven stories, parking structures, and perhaps 2,000 employees commuting at peak hours along Carroll Canyon Road—is likely.

The church’s proposal has many advantages: it is only about 140,000 square feet; contains shops for services and restaurants; is aesthetically pleasing, screening much of the parking from view; is far lower in density and height than allowed; and, would largely have customers traveling at opposite peak commute hours.

Activism of the residents insuring the community is well served is admired. However, labeling this proposal as just “big box retail” obscures the true nature of it, causing negative reaction from many who haven’t studied it or the entitled alternatives.

We’d like the park to be the best possible for the community. The Horizon proposal furthers that goal. In disclaimer, the Currie/Samuelson Development Group has no financial interest in the proposal.

Ron Currie, Currie/Samuelson Development Group

Colton Sudberry, Sudberry Properties

[Editor’s note: Sudberry Properties is the developer of the proposed Carroll Canyon Road project.]

Opposition to Carroll Canyon Road Project

In the December SRCA Newsletter Wes Danskin presents perfectly why the proposal at Carroll Canyon Road should be opposed: it violates the integrity of our community plan. In doing so, this project would “unravel” the interdependent, balanced construct of land uses and community carrying-capacities that our community plan entails, not the least, this project would generate yet more traffic—beyond the amount planned for in the community plan for this site—at a crucial entry and exit point for Scripps Ranch.

State and city law require balanced land use and facilities/circulation plans for a reason: only within the carefully constructed, interdependent balance of a plan can community integrity and quality of life be assured. Developments that violate the plan’s integrity have to be opposed.

For this reason community residents and groups, including the reactivated Save Our Scripps Ranch (SOS Ranch) and Residents for the Rational Use of the Alliant University Site (RRUAS), which led the community’s concern against the Kaiser Hospital on Pomerado Road, are opposed to the “big box” proposal on Carroll Canyon Road.

For these same reasons, RRUAS has submitted serious questions against the proposed Continuing Life Communities (CLC) project on Pomerado Road: it would violate the integrity of our community plan, and violate the carrying-capacity of the community—including excessive traffic generation. The sheer intensity of the proposed CLC project is astounding and would be another traffic disaster along one of the community’s primary entry and exit routes—and a corridor that defines the current character of Scripps Ranch.

RRUAS awaits the release of both the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Carroll Canyon Road’s big box project and the Draft EIR for CLC. In both cases, we stand by our role shared with you of safeguarding the quality of life of Scripps Ranch and our community plan.

Craig Jones, Scripps Ranch Resident

Editorial Content vs. Ads

The proposed “big box” retail development on Carroll Canyon Road is a huge issue for Scripps Ranch residents, regardless of age or length of residence in our wonderful community. The December SRCA Newsletter included a letter from longtime resident and past SRCA president and MRNPC chair, Wes Danskin.

He provided historical perspective and presented the challenge that the proposed community plan and zoning revisions pose for Scripps Ranch. The Dialogue piece included the disclaimer that the opinions expressed were strictly the author’s and do not reflect a position of the SRCA or the Newsletter.

The developer’s view was presented in a full-page ad on page 56. It claimed to provide “The Facts” in a Q and A format. There were a number of factual inaccuracies in the answers provided to the hypothetical questions. However, at first glance it is not obvious that this is in fact a paid advertisement. One must examine the page carefully to discern that the piece was crafted by Sudberry Properties, the developer of the project in question.

Although most other ads in the Newsletter are similarly not labeled, in general, their layouts are clearly recognizable as ads. We hope that future advertisers clearly label their ads when necessary.

Joan Reese, 32-Year SR Resident and Longtime Community Volunteer

[Editor’s note: It is important to the SRCA Newsletter that residents differentiate between editorial content—which is closely scrutinized—and advertisements. We are re-doubling our efforts to ensure future ads that may appear to be editorial content are clearly labeled.]