INSIDE CITY HALL Here are some of...

INSIDE CITY HALL

Here are some of the items the council considered Tuesday:

1901 NEWPORT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT

This item was continued from a previous meeting due to the filing

of a lawsuit by the applicant, Rutter Development.

In the lawsuit, Rutter seeks a court order finding that the

council’s approval from April 14 is final. At that meeting, the

council approved the entitlements authorizing building of the

high-density condominium project at 1901 Newport Boulevard.

WHAT HAPPENED

The council followed the city attorney’s office’s advice to remove

all items related to 1901 Newport from the calendar until the lawsuit

is settled.

WHAT IT MEANS

The council will not consider the issue again until the lawsuit is

settled.

WHAT WAS SAID

“I won’t support the motion because I still think there should be

a public hearing,” Councilman Allan Mansoor said.

CHANGES TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE

This was a second reading of the ordinance that changes the zoning

code for review procedures and development standards. The first

reading was on Aug. 18. The goal of the changes is to make home

remodels easier and faster.

WHAT HAPPENED

The council approved a change that means that lots that are next

to alleys will now be subject to the same criteria as any residential

lot, instead of having to go through a minor design review.

WHAT IT MEANS

Homeowners who add a second-story on a lot with a rear yard that

is next to a publicly dedicated alley, street or park do not have to

go through a lengthy review process if their project is approved by

staff.

HOME RANCH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

The development agreement was adopted by the council in December

2001. The purpose of this annual review is to determine if the

applicant, C.J. Segerstrom & Sons, and the city have made good faith

efforts to comply with the provisions and conditions of the

development agreement.

Two changes were also proposed. One deals with use of funds paid

for circulation improvements and the other addresses use of funds

originally designated for relocation and renovation of the Huscroft

House.

WHAT HAPPENED

The council unanimously approved the Planning Commission’s

recommendation to determine that the Segerstroms and the city have

demonstrated good faith and compliance with the terms and conditions

of the agreement. It also approved the two changes.

WHAT IT MEANS

The city can now use funds paid by the Segerstroms toward traffic

improvements required by the project beyond the General Plan as

matching funds to receive grant funding for other circulation

improvements throughout the city. The $200,000 that the Segerstroms

were originally going to contribute for the relocation and renovation

of the Huscroft House will now be used for another public purpose

that both parties agree on.

WHAT WAS SAID

“I hate to see the $200,000 for the Huscroft House disappear into

the general fund,” Robert Graham said. “Maybe the council could

consider dividing up [the funds] to [Costa Mesa] schools that didn’t

benefit from the Home Ranch project.”