Q&A; -- Costa Mesa Citizens for Responsible Growth

Lolita Harper

1. Who are the members of Costa Mesa Concerned Citizens for

Responsible Growth and what is the group’s main goal?

A. We’re a group of Costa Mesa residents which grew out of

long-standing organizations and coalitions working since the 1980s to

preserve and improve the quality of life in Costa Mesa. We include

teachers, doctors, engineers, contractors, retirees, renters, homeowners

and owners of small businesses.

2. What are the main objections to the Home Ranch project as it is now

proposed?

A. The proposed general plan amendment to allow the Ikea project at

Home Ranch will result in twice the traffic from the site as the existing

general plan, contribute significantly to basin-wide pollution, increase

demand for public services and infrastructure, exacerbate the serious

imbalance of jobs and housing in Costa Mesa, and define a major city

gateway with a big-box store. We’ll have more overcrowding as workers

double up and triple up to afford housing, leading to further

deterioration of our housing stock and increased pressure for higher

densities in our existing neighborhoods citywide.

3. Why is traffic such a concern when the developers have agreed to

fund more than the required road improvements?

A. Their traffic analysis assumes construction of the Gisler-Garfield

bridge in order to make intersections function with the project. This

would create pressure to build the bridge, directing traffic through a

residential area, past TeWinkle and California schools. The project uses

up what little excess roadway capacity we might have to deal with other

issues, such as eliminating the bridges from the master plan of highways.

Further, this question assumes they are doing more to improve traffic

than required. Except for their own personal offramp into the Ikea store,

the project provides only those improvements required by the city to

improve intersections adversely affected by the project. The developers

aren’t fixing anything they didn’t help break. While the applicant is

paying more than just the standard city trip fees paid by all developers,

these fees typically recover only about two-thirds of the cost of new

traffic and address only improvements needed to serve growth under the

existing general plan. The proposed general plan amendment increases

growth and increases the need for more roadway improvements, hence the

need for more mitigation.

4. Residents can’t assume that the land will remain undeveloped, so

what would you support at the Home Ranch site? A. The existing general

plan, or better yet the balance of uses provided in the 1990 general

plan, would be preferable to the proposed project. An increase in

residential acreage could help address our need for more quality housing

in Costa Mesa and still result in economic benefits for the landowner.

5. If the City Council votes to approve the project, what is the next

step?

A. Options available include litigation and a petition drive to take

the project approval directly to the voters in a referendum, as was done

in 1987 and 1988. The citizens’ groups won both the litigation and both

referenda -- decisively, with 60% of voters opposed to the proposed

developments.

6. Any other thoughts?

A. The developers claim massive financial benefits to the city, but

their analysis is flawed. They assume an optimistic, undocumented rate of

sales to calculate future sales tax revenues and a pessimistic value for

housing to calculate property tax revenues. They so underestimate

commercial costs and overestimate residential costs that, using their

methodology and assumptions, South Coast Plaza would generate about the

same demand for city services as only 308 single-family homes. The

project approval would be locked in for 20 years. So, if additional

problems occur, or the proposed fixes don’t work, we’re stuck with the

mess. Even if critical new issues arise, project approvals remain in

place. The developer proposes to mitigate project traffic with

improvements along Fairview Road, which will require separate

environmental review. If this review discloses serious impacts resulting

from the road improvements, we will be forced to build them anyway or

live with traffic congestion. But Home Ranch construction will go on,

regardless.