April 6, 2024
Lin Sulu Pastrana
2237 Winsome Place
Escondido, CA 92029
Email: [email protected]
San Marcos City Council
1 Civic Center Drive
San Marcos, CA 92069
Phone: (760) 744-1050
RE: Notice of Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity and Authorization of Condemnation Proceedings to Acquire Property Interests by Eminent Domain [California Code of Civil Procedure 1245.235] Property located on Shubin Lane (no street number), San Marcos, CA 92078 Assessor’s Parcel No. 221-100-09-00
Dear Council Members of City of San Marcos:
I have owned the land on Shubin Lane since 1997, almost 30 years now. I bought the land as a long- term investment, for I saw the potential in the area and have anticipate growth in San Marcos. I have made a career of independent real estate investment for many years, mostly involving construction, and understand some the business of construction.
When I immigrated and became a US citizen 45 years ago, I was happy and hopeful in how America was fair and lawful. I wanted to establish new roots in US, and the City of San Marcos is where I have a few investments. These real estate investments, mainly kept and not sold, are what I wanted to leave my children as my legacy. In my heart, I feel like a land developer, and want to see things being built.
Of course, I support the growth and progress being made in the San Marco's vision, Heart of the City. I have counted on it and waited anxiously for many years. I have been waiting to develop on the land, but needed to see how the area develops more so I can develop properly in accordance to the city's development. I had offers to buy my land starting back 20 years ago from various developers, when the city plan was becoming more known. I had consulted with the city planner Mr. Schaffer back then, where I have a recording he agreed to, and he assured me that the city would not force me to sell, and would only get involved if it was for public road network. Back then there was no plan yet for where public roads would be.
More than 10 years ago, before 2014, Mike McDonald from a single developer company, "Sea Breeze Properties", or known as "Urban Village", start to get aggressive in asking me to sale. They contacted me repeatedly and show my maps of my property being cut into two by a future street taking up half of my property. In fact, they submitted a grading plan that included my parcel, as if they already owned my
Page 2
land. They wrote in the letter implying the threat of Eminent Domain, the fact that the road going through my land lowers my property value, and actually offered an amount lower than offers I got 10 years before. I have seen these games before, and I refused to sell, despite multiple attempts by them.
I still wanted to develop my own land. I was getting mentally stressed by this, and got sick physically because of this.
Then 8 years ago, 2016, Mr. McDonald at "Sea Breeze Properties" contacted me again, this time indicating that they would be willing to do a land lease, if we can just meet and talk. I asked to communicate in writing, for English is my second language, and I need to take time translating and understand what is being said. I was then interested in a land lease alternative, so that someone else could do the construction for the land development to be done on my land. No more communication about this land lease in 2016.
Then 6 years ago, 2018, a different person at the same company, Gary Levitt, start to contact me repeatedly for 5 month, paused 5 month, and then started again repeatedly for 12 month, asking to buy, and not mentioning anything about land lease. I still wanted to develop my own land, or to lease it, but not to sell. In the letter, it says that a different road, an east/west main road (not the same as 10 years ago), now passes through my land, as part of the City's plan. Again the mention of City may use Eminent Domain to force me to sell. This is when we reached out to Arthur Pinon at City Planning to understand from the city's perspective. It did not seem like the City was helping "Sea Breeze Properties" acquire land. My stress level increased more from this.
Then a year later, 2021, Mr. Levitt, under company letter header of "North City, Urban Village", made another higher offer. Again the mention of Eminent Domain. I refused again and asked him not to bother me with this. Later next year he told me that they own several properties surrounding my land and they are interested in creating a "city block" by consolidation of properties. The city plan approved at the time was SP 21-0003, and it showed an intersection of 2 roads at my land.
Page 3
What was apparent was the strategy of planning the public road through the land in order to coerce the landowner to sell, especially at a lower value, leverage the fear and the unknown effects of Eminent Domain. Back 20 years ago, I learned that City of San Marcos, City Counsel specifically, has the authority to condemn properties only when there is a public street network, and only as a last resort. Back then, Mr. Schaffer said the city would work with the individual landowners as much as with the developers, expressing that the City would not take sides.
Last year, 2023, I received a purchase offer from City of San Marcos. The purchase indicated that land is in the area of the general plan of "Right-of-way, Residential, and Mixed-Use". It does have a vague statement about the highest and best use being "Assemblage with adjoining land for master-planned development consistent with the University District Specific Plan". It basically describes the use of the land per SP 21-0003, where it has an intersection of 2 roads into my land, with left side left too little for Residential, and right side too little for Mixed Use. This road allocation is also the basis for calculating the proposed cost per square-foot, using a similar mixture of low-medium density residential and high- density mixed-used land. Interestingly, it omits the sales figure of the nearby lot to the City, parcel # 221-100-72-00, which the City bought for higher price at half the land size. That excluded parcel is located at 130 S Twin Oaks Valley, with size of 0.51 acreage, and with a price per square of $1,283, sold for $2,340,900 in 2/17/2021, and now with estimated FMV of $3,200,000. The offer letter says that not able to reach a sales agreement may lead to the next step of Eminent Domain.
I have researched and can name some parcels that were purchased by the City of San Marcos (don't know if it was Eminent domain) that were then later sold to the land developers. If there were some roads crossing the parcel, the road usage was relatively small. I hope the City of San Marcos was not buying up the land to sell to the land developer, thus taking sides, nor doing so for financial gains.
For my stance, for the betterment of the Heart of the City development, if the City of San Marcos deemed it best use to cross my land with 2 streets and actually uses it as planned, then I would have to accept the City acquiring my land through Eminent Domain for use with public road network. However,
Page 4
my fear is that this is the same old strategy of threatening to run a road through my property, thus forcing me to sale, and then reallocating the use of that property for little or no road since it would be more profitable to do so. Another fear is that the planners can always plan streets in such a way to strategically force an Eminent Domain on my property, since I refused to sell. In doing so, the future profit ends up going to the land developer, taking it away from me. With all the different options available to the land developer and city planner, why is it that the road is purposely planned to cross my property, if not to be able to use Eminent Domain to acquire it, since I would not sell it otherwise. So now that I am forced into a corner, I ask that the use of Eminent Domain would be limited to precisely the amount of land the public road network actually uses, and not my entire parcel. I would want a way to guarantee that is the case, not a way for the city to choose who should profit.
I know that there is a newer version of the plan, SP 21-0004, where the street is not finalized in that it would cross my property. This new plan that does not have roads fully crossing my parcel was first submitted in 9/9/2021 and finalized on 8/22/2023, where it was signed by Mr. Levitt, right before I received the offer letter to buy from City of San Marcos.
I ask for a fair and impartial judgement on forcibly taking my land for use of public road network. Please let it be really for public road network, not for enable future profit to large company at the expense of small landowners. Please guarantee that such forced acquiring of the land is limited to the amount of land used by the road actually created, instead of my entire parcel.
Sincerely,
Lin Sulu Pastrana