Palomar Mountain Home
Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Home     Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Minutes Page

Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Minutes, 6/14/2008 Special Board Meeting minutes

Minutes of the Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Special Meeting

June 14, 2008

DRAFT not approved for distribution

Board Members Present:

Terri Bailey, Heather Beer, Glenn Borland, Cecelia Borland (alternate), Robert Carlyle, Elizabeth Getzoff, Bruce Graves, Rob Hawk, Susan Humason, Bonnie Phelps, Michael Pique, Earl Walls.

Board Members Absent:

Donna Dose, Scott Kardel, Bob O'Neill, Alan Serry.

The PMPO Special Board Meeting was convened 10:04 AM June 14, 2008, at the Palomar Mountain Volunteer Fire Department. Besides the above-listed board members, Doug Lande and Tom Burton were present. New board member Heather Beer submitted her signed conflict-of-interest disclosure form to the Chair.

Old Business

North Mountain San Diego General Plan 2020:

Tom Burton reviewed the contents of attachments he included in his June 9 email to the board. As discussed at the May 3 and May 24 meetings at the Lodge and Fire Station, the San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU) would like our input on three topics: mapping (definition of where commercial uses would be allowed), density (minimum acreage per `dwelling unit'), and community plan. The 2020 general plan is the highest level of `law' relating to land use in the county; beneath this level, and later developed consistent with the general plan (but not duplicating it) are zoning laws; and still at a lower level are building permit processes. In other words, the zoning and building permit processes cannot permit something that the general plan does not allow - but also all that the general plan would allow will not necessarily be allowed under later adopted zoning and building permit processes.

This meeting's purpose is to write a letter of recommendation to the County, following up on the recent PMPO board, special, and annual meetings with the community and DPLU representatives Leanne Carmichael and Eric Lardy, March 22, May 3, and May 24. Libby Getzoff asked if the boundaries we recommend for general plan designations had to be land parcel lines; Tom said Leanne said yes, that otherwise we have just `blobs' with unclear boundaries that lead to problems like those with the telecommunications overlay.

Bruce Graves suggested marking a map with specific possibilities that could be discussed and voted on. Bonnie Phelps and Michael Pique cut colored paper strips and placed them on a county-provided aerial photo-map that included parcel boundaries and topographic contours. After participation by all, three successively inclusive regions were agreed upon for discussion:

[ See map used at meeting (click for bigger)

[ See topography (click for bigger)


- about 7 parcels including the post office, Mother's Kitchen restaurant and store, the Woods property across Canfield Road from the store, the helicopter pad to the south, the U.S. Forest Service day camp, and the fire department.


- (originally green but changed to be easier to see) 2 parcels in addition to `orange', to the west, including the Yoga Center.


- 5 parcels in addition to `orange' and `purple', to the west along State Park road.

The regions proposed were discussed in detail, with frequent reference to the May 4 Lodge meeting and to the 152 responses to Jim Hamerly's survey. Robert Carlyle thought that 2 times or 3 times increase in potential commercial space over the existing store and helipad would be OK, but not 10 times. Tom Burton pointed out that slopes and setback requirements imposed in zoning and permitting would likely restrict usage to being close to State Park Road. Bonnie Phelps said that even George Ravenscroft's 8 acre parcel on the south side of State Park road has only 1/4 acre flat, immediately next to the road. Robert Carlyle asked why locations that could never be used should be included. Tom Burton said that if a parcel is not included, then it could never be, so if any part of a parcel is potentially suitable, all of the parcel should be designated at the general plan stage. Rob Hawk said that the general plan is options for future opportunities, that ``commercial'' might be a veterans' hospital, or a walk-in medical clinic. Susan Humason felt the community was in favor of the purple area, therefore if we ``asked'' for the yellow, the County might be willing to compromise and give us the purple designated area in the final negotiations.

In voting on the three proposals (orange, purple, yellow), each board member was allocated three votes to distribute among the proposals as he or she wished. The votes were cast and tallied, see `Tabulation of Votes' table, columns `orange', `purple', and `yellow'.

Orange received 6 votes, purple 10, and yellow 17. It was therefore moved by Rob Hawk and seconded by Glenn Borland that the `yellow' region be recommended to the county with the more restrictive `purple' region as a fall-back position should the county be unwilling to approve the `yellow'. The motion was approved.

Discussion began on the second point, minimum acreage requirements. Bruce Graves moved and Glenn Borland seconded that we recommend going back to the pre-FCI 8 acre minimum, slope-adjusted. The motion passed 7 yes, 4 no, see Tabulation column `8-Acre'. Robert Carlyle moved and Bruce Graves seconded that we recommend a 10 acre minimum, slope-adjusted. The motion passed 4 yes, 3 no, 4 abstain; see Tabulation column `10-Acre'.

Discussion began on the third point, community plan. Since there have been no major changes on the mountain in the past seven years, Susan Humason suggested we re-send the letter we sent the DPLU on November 14, 2001, posting copies at the store and at the post office. Bruce Graves so moved and Glenn Borland seconded. The motion passed 10 yes, 0 no, 1 abstain; see Tabulation column `2001-letter'.

Tabulation of Votes

Board Member orange purple yellow 8-Acre 10-Acre 2001-Letter Post-Info Include-Fisher
Libby Getzoff 1 2 0 No Abstain Yes Yes Abstain
Glenn Borland 1 2 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Mike Pique 0 1 2 Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Rob Hawk 0 0 3 No Yes Abstain Yes Yes
Heather Beer 1 2 0 Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Bonnie Phelps 0 0 3 Yes Abstain Yes Yes Yes
Susan Humason 0 0 3 Yes Abstain Yes Yes Yes
Earl Walls 0 0 3 Yes Abstain Yes Yes Yes
Robert Carlyle 0 3 0 No Yes Yes Abstain Abstain
Bruce Graves 0 0 3 Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Terri Bailey 3 0 0 No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vote totals 6 10 17 7 Yes, 4 No 4 Yes, 3 No 10 Yes 10 Yes 9 Yes

New Business

Communications with Community:

Bruce Graves said the Palomar Mountain community deserves an explanation of what happened at the 2008 annual meeting, that resulted in the resignation of our Chair Jim Hamerly. Heather Beer agrees that the community needs this update. Bruce moves we email and post Jim's `Word of Explanation' and also any statement Tom Burton might wish to make. Glenn Borland seconded and the motion passed 11 yes, 0 no, 1 abstain; see Tabulation column `Post-Info'.

Libby Getzoff asks how we can reach out beyond the electronically-connected community. Tom Burton suggests a snail-mail news option, but Robert Carlyle points out that is hard and expensive, to tell them instead to look at the store bulletin board. Terri Bailey offers to make the Fire Safe Council bulletin board (next to the post office) more attractive and to put PMPO notices up there and at Bailey's Resort too.

Jerry Fisher letter:

Jerry Fisher sent a letter to the board in May asking for the PMPO's support for his request to go back to pre-FCI land use rules for his Highway 76 property on the south slope of Palomar Mountain. After discussion that the board was not in posession of all the facts and history, Bonnie Phelps moved and Heather Beer seconded motion to include his letter with our 2020 response and note that the PMPO is in agreement with the general principle of restoration of original land use designations but that the PMPO has not researched or verified Mr. Fisher's individual situation. The motion passed 9 yes, 0 no, 2 abstain; see Tabulation column `Include-Fisher'.

Formally Establishing 2020 Committee:

Tom Burton said that many DPLU meetings were upcoming and the PMPO will need to meet spokespeople and perhaps mobilize for public hearings. The de-facto 2020 committee has been Bonnie Phelps, Earl Walls, and Tom Burton; Tom suggests confirming it as a PMPO sub-committee to meet as necessary. Bruce Graves so moved, Glenn Borland seconded, the motion passed 10 yes, 0 no, 1 abstain.

Future Meeting Dates:

Board meeting dates for the next year were confirmed as August 23 and November 8, 2008, and January 24, April 25, and May 23, 2009. Bonnie Phelps agreed to post these to the on-line community calendar. A newsletter working meeting will be on March 21 or 28, 2009.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:41 PM.

Michael Pique

Palomar Mountain home,
Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Home     Palomar Mountain Planning Organization Minutes Page