Condo plan a shadowy one for Costa Mesa

Paul Flanagan

The Costa Mesa Citizens for Responsible Growth has asked for a

rehearing of the environmental report and the general plan and master

plan amendments for the proposed Plaza Residences condominium project

at 1901 Newport Blvd.

The group is not opposed to property owners’ realizing full

benefit of their land; we believe that development must balance the

interests of the developer, the neighbors and the community as a

whole. Further, whenever a community has evolved a system of

procedures for development, those procedures must be followed.

The public hearing portion of the process for the project has been

flawed. The City Council and Redevelopment Agency allowed speakers

only three minutes each to discuss complex, cognitive issues.

Three-minute sound bites are inadequate to elucidate problems and

omissions in complicated and technical documents and to educate the

decision makers.

Those who hope to improve the project and to reduce the troubling

effects ought to be given sufficient time for a comprehensive

presentation. The council did give such time to the residents’ group

before approval of the Home Ranch project. We were given fair

opportunity then to make our points.

The council approved the Plaza Residences project prior to the

effective dates of the amendments that the council passed at the same

session. The council ought at least to wait until there was a legal

basis for the approval.

Because the project doesn’t contain affordable housing, the

developer will pay an “in lieu” fee to the city for the city to build

such housing. If the 14 units of affordable housing required by state

law are not built within the city’s redevelopment zone, then 28 units

will have to be constructed by the city.

The average cost to build such dwellings historically has been

$91,000. For 14 units, that amounts to $1.07 million and for 28

units, it is $2.54 million. But our city is only asking the developer

to pay an “in lieu” fee of $245,000. Should the developer choose not

to build the units required by state law, then the developer can

deposit the $245,000 or 20% of the construction cost and let the

residents pay the remainder.

While we have a municipal code that is designed to protect

inhabitants from undue gloom of shadows from tall buildings, the

council granted a variance so that the inhabitants of Barnard Street

should dwell in shade. Several of the applicant’s exhibits give the

lie to the voodoo claim that the shadow is not significant. Despite

the developer’s junk science, the sun does cause buildings to cast

shadows at noon.

No evidence has been presented to justify a variance for the 40

parking space deficiency in the project. The council allows this

project to have fewer parking spaces per dwelling or per square foot

of office space than it requires of other properties in the city.

State law requires the applicant to present positive supporting

evidence to justify variances. The Plaza Residences presented no such

evidence, and the council granted it a building height 20% greater

than that allowed to other property owners. Without that variance,

there would not be shadow problems for the Barnard Street neighbors.

It would appear that our council has harkened to the old saying

“Do something, even if it is wrong.”

The residents of Costa Mesa should watch the Pilot for the City

Council agenda. Attend the council meeting, and get the council back

on the track of looking out for residents’ interests.

* EDITOR’S NOTE: Paul Flanagan is a resident of Costa Mesa. The

City Council on Monday made no decision about the request to rehear

the plan for the condominiums at 1901 Newport Blvd. The council is

scheduled to take the issue up again later this month.