Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
The "All Opinions are Welcome, but Sorry no Instigators" Board -> Rockaway Township Free Speech -> Same story, diff place - not about race / religion
Post Info TOPIC: Same story, diff place - not about race / religion
Jay R


Status: Offline
Posts: 203
Date:
Same story, diff place - not about race / religion
Permalink  

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/06/25/news/inland/22_11_306_24_04.txt


Group files lawsuit over planned megachurch

By: JENNIFER KABBANY - Staff Writer

VISTA ---- History is repeating itself, as an environmental group is suing the city for the second time in about three years over a church that seeks to build a megachurch in northwest Vista.

The Guajome Alliance for Responsible Development filed a lawsuit last week claiming that the City Council did not take into account how much the project would affect the surrounding community and environment when it approved the large North Coast Church project May 25.


The alliance, whose founders say represents about 200 Vista, Bonsall, Oceanside and county residents, claim in the lawsuit that the church would cause nearby neighbors of the project to suffer "irreparable harm." The church seeks to build on a 40-acre parcel bounded by Guajome Lake Road, Osborne Street and North Santa Fe Avenue.







"We continually tried to point out (to the council) there are some legal issues here ... they don't listen to citizens when they are giving input," Mariko Davis, founder of the alliance and its vice president, said Thursday.

"This is how it happen the last time around as well," Davis said, referring to the lawsuit the alliance filed after the council initially approved the project in 2001. "It's a last resort but it's the ultimate resort."

Davis said the alliance does not object to the church and does not dispute that it offers benefits to the community, but that the fight is strictly a "land-use issue."

Charlie Bradshaw, the church's executive pastor, said he believes the lawsuit will be unsuccessful.

"We are disappointed they would do this to the church that is already in their community, but we are confident all the legal and environmental issues have been correctly addressed during the approval process," Bradshaw said Thursday.

The council blessed the project in 2001, but the alliance sued and the courts ordered officials to complete an environmental study. That study, released in November, showed that the new church would require major road improvements, increase traffic and urbanize the area.

The council approved the church project a second time last month. Plans call for a 100,000-square-foot building with 950 parking spots to be built in the first year. As membership grows, church officials will add buildings, classrooms, offices and parking. After about 10 or 20 years, the facility would total nine buildings and 365,000 square feet.

The buildings would include a main sanctuary, mini-sanctuaries, administrative offices, library, bookstore, kitchen, school facilities for grades K-12, 2,300 parking spaces, including two two-story parking structures and a 20,000-square-foot commercial office for support services.

According to the lawsuit, that description is inadequate and unclear.

The lawsuit also contends that the city failed to adequately consider environmental effects as required by state law, including cumulative effects and irreversible environmental changes. It also states the council's decision is inconsistent with the city's general plan, a document that defines how the city intends to grow.

Part of the lawsuit also brings up the fact that Councilwoman Judy Ritter voted on the issue although she "acknowledged that she was a member of North Coast church, yet she did not recuse herself from consideration of the project."

"I never said I was a member, I said I was an attendee," Ritter said Thursday, adding that she goes "most weekends."

Furthermore, the councilwoman said, "in all my six years of being on council I've never had a project come before us that has tried to make as many changes to accommodate the neighbors and the neighborhood."

"They really attempted to work with them," she said. "What else could go there? Would a Wal-Mart be a better project? ... I made an independent decision that this project was a good project no matter what church it was."

Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Stone said the office is not surprised about the lawsuit.

"It is relatively common for this type of lawsuit to be filed ... when a neighborhood group has a disagreement over a project," he said.

Contact staff writer Jennifer Kabbany at (760) 631-6622 or jkabbany@nctimes.com.


 



__________________
This message is posted to the "All Opinions are Welcome, but Sorry no Instigators" Internet Forum. Reproduction of this post on any other website is expressly forbidden without prior permission of the author.
Rockaway10yrs


Status: Offline
Posts: 14
Date:
Permalink  

I don't think this is a comparison that should be made to loudly.  A quick study of the area referenced by this article shows that it's location appears to be worse for a large church than the Green Pond Rd. location.  It is more than twice as far from the interstate as is the Agilent site.  Like the Agilent site, it's located on a two lane Rd, but set deep within a much more heavily developed residential area.  Also, it's an area that has plenty of traffic already according to local news stories(1).
As for size, the Vista church starts out smaller than CC's original proposed plans, but they make it clear that they'll eventually grow to about the same size as CC's original plans.  Also of note is the fact that the Vista site is only 40 acres total, but the Agilent site is 60 buildable acres with another 40 acres buffer zone. With all that, it's interesting to see that the Vista council approved the plan.  Now, with an opposition group filing a lawsuit, the church has had to provide studies showing it will not hurt the environment, but it seems that they will eventually be allowed to build there.  With that said, if CC plans on complying with the Highlands bill it's hard to see how they can be rightly denied here.


(1) http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/jenkins/20040124-9999_1mc24jenkin1.html



__________________
BR


Status: Offline
Posts: 329
Date:
Permalink  

quote:
Originally posted by: Rockaway10yrs
"I don't think this is a comparison that should be made to loudly.  A quick study of the area referenced by this article shows that it's location appears to be worse for a large church than the Green Pond Rd. location. 

Have you been to this site? Have you even been to San Diego County. Apples and Oranges my friend. In the neighborhoods sourounding 140 GPR (Meriden, Old Beach Glenn) we have 1-5 acre lots, very rural, lots of trees. In San Diego, they build homes right on top of each other. It's very congested there. Everyone wants to live in the warm weather.



__________________
Rational


Status: Offline
Posts: 1663
Date:
Permalink  

However, if Greg Mayers estimate of 25,000 members after about 5 years is correct, it is a horse of a very different colour!  You will have to go back and find his analysis on this, but he calculated it about 4 different ways and always came out with a very similar number in my recollection.  I think he did it by relative Return on Investment, Net Future Growth based on past growth, physical size and space allocation, parking capability and maybe some other criteria.  I think that he also tried to nail Ireland to a membership cap in one of the meetings at 25,000 and he refused to do so.   I remember that it created quite a stir at the time.

__________________
Rockaway10yrs


Status: Offline
Posts: 14
Date:
Permalink  

BR, I agree with you, the area in Vista seems to be much more congested already, yet the town council is letting the Church in.  The argument CC will make is that they should be allowed into Green Pond Rd. because it isn't already a very congested area.  They will argue that the area, since it isn't packed tightly, can handle some additional activity.  The Vista case will help to prove their point:  If that area can handle a mega-church, so can the Agilent site.  And that's my point, this article works against us. 


And Rational, Craig Maier's numbers could have some validity, but while you're quoting him, remember that his final word here was that he and his lawyers have concluded that CC will eventually be allowed in.


Jay posted this as "same story...".  My point is that if it is the same story, then it's really only a matter of time before they move in. 



__________________
Rational


Status: Offline
Posts: 1663
Date:
Permalink  

Good Point, Rockaway10yrs. 

__________________
Rational


Status: Offline
Posts: 1663
Date:
Permalink  

I decided to give my lawyer a call and ask his opinion of the Church situation.  He is not a land use expert but has been following the situation via the papers. 


He says that the towship should have come up with any reason whatsoever it could dream of to take the property by eminent domain.  He thought that was going to happen with the BOE involved.  Essentially, he said that he thinks that the township really blew it and that it is really going to be difficult to keep them out now.  Keep in mind that this is not his area of expertise which he kept emphasizing.


Sorry for the negative report.



__________________
BR


Status: Offline
Posts: 329
Date:
Permalink  

quote:
Originally posted by: Rational
"However, if Greg Mayers estimate of 25,000 members after about 5 years is correct, it is a horse of a very different colour!  You will have to go back and find his analysis on this, but he calculated it about 4 different ways and always came out with a very similar number in my recollection.  I think he did it by relative Return on Investment, Net Future Growth based on past growth, physical size and space allocation, parking capability and maybe some other criteria.  I think that he also tried to nail Ireland to a membership cap in one of the meetings at 25,000 and he refused to do so.   I remember that it created quite a stir at the time."
I thought you were "Greg Mayers". Same email adress?

__________________
BR


Status: Offline
Posts: 329
Date:
Permalink  

quote:
Originally posted by: Rational
"I decided to give my lawyer a call and ask his opinion of the Church situation.  He is not a land use expert but has been following the situation via the papers.  He says that the towship should have come up with any reason whatsoever it could dream of to take the property by eminent domain.  He thought that was going to happen with the BOE involved.  Essentially, he said that he thinks that the township really blew it and that it is really going to be difficult to keep them out now.  Keep in mind that this is not his area of expertise which he kept emphasizing. Sorry for the negative report."
There are many reasons a town can condem property. We need about 6 lacrosse fields and a youth center to keep RT kids off the streets and out of the mall. I think this is a good reason.

__________________
Rational


Status: Offline
Posts: 1663
Date:
Permalink  

I am not Greg Meyers. 

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
The "All Opinions are Welcome, but Sorry no Instigators" Board -> Rockaway Township Free Speech -> Same story, diff place - not about race / religion
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard