Clarifications
The La Jolla Town Council page in last week’s Village News (page 9) listed the wrong date for a special meeting of the La Jolla Shores Association to hear the Chabad Center proposal. The meeting will be held Wednesday, Feb. 7, 7 p.m., at Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Sumner Auditorium.
Also in last week’s paper, a subhead on the Las Patronas story (page 1) indicated that the group had raised more than $1 million for nine San Diego groups. In fact, Las Patronas gives grants to many groups each year; their Jan. 17 luncheon featured nine major beneficiaries.

Bird Rock Form-Based Code: no comment, please
The Bird Rock Form-Based Code process is spearheaded by a minority in the Bird Rock Community ” reserved for those individuals who were able to attend a workshop that consisted of three meetings and a weekend four-day charrette. The process was conducted with city-hired architects. (Hired from Scott Peters’ office.) If you weren’t a part of this, tough luck.
Two public forums were held for the public to see the proposed new code. The first meeting was on Nov. 14, 2006, with a showing of how they came up with the plan. This was presented to the public with key details of the plan not yet laid out. Still, a vote was pushed forward to approve the plan.
The second public forum was held on Jan. 23, 2007. Once again, anyone in the Bird Rock or greater La Jolla area who was not involved in the workshop process was guided to feel their concerns and criticisms were late in coming. For this second forum, a first draft of the proposed new code was presented. But this draft had only been available to public view for one week (it was made available to the public on Jan. 15, 2007). Even some of those who had attended the earlier workshops were now hesitant to accept some, if not several, of the draft’s proposals. They expressed concern with unexpected changes in the plan, and the push to proceed so quickly. Those who found fault with the plan were nicely marginalized.
The question remaining is: were these two forums and the workshop public? Yes. The problem with this public process is as follows: Input was gathered from a small group of individuals at meetings that were not easy for most people to attend. Then a much smaller group took control of the agenda, with the Scott Peters-hired architects at the helm. They came up with three stories ” though it was not one of the things the community wanted (quite the contrary). And now they are making it hard for people to ask questions. Notably at the Jan. 23 meeting, they were quite resistant and defensive to various lines of questioning raised.
I had my reservations initially, but kept them to myself. But it’s clear that the three-story element of this plan has been very carefully and purposely implemented. Has the re-zoning of La Jolla come to visit us again, only this time through the back door? According to City Council President Scott Peters less than one year ago, at the May 4, 2006 La Jolla Community Planning Association meeting, “The three stories and the FAR are dead. Reiterated ” The three stories and the FAR are off the table.” But here we are again!
Cindy Thorsen, La Jolla

A Trojan Horse has entered Bird Rock
A Trojan horse named “Form-based Code” has entered the gates of Bird Rock, and the trap has been sprung. This is the wedge that could introduce three stories into Bird Rock and ultimately the rest of La Jolla. Promised to represent the restrictions and intent of our existing PDO (preferably with the community’s desired amendments known as the “Bird Rock 7” or “12”), this new code was supposed to be a positive approach to zoning guidelines ” listing what was desirable rather than just listing restrictions. It was supposed to simplify the code and make it understandable. The Bird Rock community believed the promises.
But instead of refining and improving the old PDO, the consultants blew off the longtime three-story restriction before the ink was even dry. It’s far from being approved by the community, but developers are already waving the FBC around, claiming three stories are now A-OK. Is the fix in?
Last year, a pair of architects, Mark Lyon and Michael Morton, tried to break the PDO preclusion of three stories, and instead became pariahs. So a new avenue was needed to open La Jolla to more dense development. Bird Rock, with its code revisions in process, was a natural venue, and two new architect/consultants were sent in. They are smoother than Lyon and Morton, yet their “assistants” are the same two Bird Rock residents who put a community-friendly face on the three-story option last year. Just last week these consultants pulled an 11th-hour switcheroo, actually lobbying in favor of Mark Lyon’s three-story project, which does not conform to either the proposed FBC or the existing PDO.
If one examines the actual FBC documents, they are complicated, have serious omissions, and do not deliver what the community asked for. This was supposed to be a document that would be easily understood by virtually anyone, but it is hard to interpret, even by professionals. It does not use standard definitions required by the city, so is unlikely to be accepted as it is currently written. By the time it is rejected or sent back for more work, however, damage may have been done.
My instincts tell me there’s a royal scam going on here. Let’s make sure we know what we are voting on before going forward.
If you haven’t read the FBC documents yourself, vote no.
If you tried to read the documents and couldn’t make any sense out of them, vote no.
If you don’t want the restrictions on three stories lifted, vote no.
If you have reservations about the process, vote no.
If you think adoption of FBC is being done in haste, vote no.
If you believe there may be unfortunate unintended consequences, vote no.
If you think the old PDO with the Bird Rock amendments is a better alternative, vote no.
If you want your voice heard, sign the petition that is being circulated!
Don Schmidt, Bird Rock

Reject the exec
The annual meeting of the MAD [Maintenance Assessment District] is planning to build a bureaucracy. The original idea for MAD was to beautify Bird Rock, not build a bureaucracy. In this year’s budget, an executive director position is proposed, with offices, no less. Can staff and a bigger budget be far behind?
The original plan was an initial assessment of $100 with $50 per year after that. The proposal is now for $75 and it is being advertised as lower than the maximum. They are already over the projections that we used to sell this idea to the residents of Bird Rock. Why if there is such a “healthy reserve” are we being charged 50 percent more than last year?
Why are we trying to take over the job that we pay our taxes to the city to do? Clearly most of the money is being spent to “beautify” SeaHaus to the detriment of the rest of Bird Rock. The roundabouts have already been responsible for one death and possibly two. There is no slowdown in the traffic as it is being treated as a racecourse for the fast and expensive cars that run up and down the boulevard.
We did not ask for any of this. We do not need any of this. Bird Rock is gradually being overtaken by developers and development. The charm of Bird Rock is gone. I have been here for 40 years and have seen it eroding over the years. Where is that charming seaside feel that we had here? With an executive director and a bigger budget it is going to disappear even faster.
We must reject any more encroachment, reject the proposed budget, and reject the executive director before it is completely gone.
Gillian M. Ackland, La Jolla

Course goes downhill, city raises fees
I wanted to bring attention to the miserable situation going on at Mission Bay Golf Course since the City of San Diego took over management responsibilities. I use the facilities regularly and I am absolutely appalled at the condition of the tee boxes and the fact that the practice putting green has been closed since July 2006. That’s correct ” it’s been over six months since a golfer has hit a practice putt at Mission Bay because, why? ” they can’t grow a patch of grass!
And how do they compensate us loyal golfers for the miserable state of the course and practice areas? ” they raise the fees! As an avid golfer, I feel that chipping and putting are just as important as hammering balls down the range. It now costs $22 for 18 holes and $7 for a medium bucket of balls. I feel they should be discounting the green fees and range fees until they can get their act together, make the course presentable and open the practice green.
Ian Dyer, La Jolla