|
Palos Verdes Peninsula News
Thursday, May 24, 2007
by Chris BoydCouncil mulls moratorium on development
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Two council members are firm in their request for a ‘timeout,’ while others aren’t convinced the city is in right legal position.
By Chris Boyd - Peninsula News
RHE — During a sometimes heated meeting, City Council voted 4-1 Tuesday to direct staff to prepare an ordinance that would place a moratorium on development in the Peninsula Village area of Rolling Hills Estates while officials struggle to get a grip on where they’re going with the proposal. Council members will vote on whether to enact the ordinance at their meeting on Tuesday, June 12.
Crews work on an 18-unit condominium complex at the corner of Crenshaw Boulevard and Silver Spur Road in Rolling Hills Estates. City officials are weighing the merits of a moratorium on downtown development while they further study the Peninsula Village plan.
Mayor Susan Seamans dissented. “I just think we’re trying to please a certain part of our community that we don’t know how large it is,” Seamans said, adding that a moratorium could spell legal trouble for the city. “The majority of the population thinks we’re doing fine.”
Maybe so, but letters to the Peninsula News and comments at a March workshop focusing on the Village Plan indicate at least some people are upset with the project. It calls for turning parts of the RHE commercial district between Hawthorne and Crenshaw boulevards into a European-style village complete with high-density condominiums, apartments, offices and small businesses.
“To imagine that we know what other people do or think is overreaching,” said Councilman Steve Zuckerman.
“We need to show the people in RHE who are quite unhappy about this that we are taking action,” said Councilman John Addleman.
Officials already have abandoned the draft environmental impact report released last fall for the Peninsula Village Overlay Zone, which proposed a maximum density of 40 residential units per acre, allowing for 900 total dwelling units downtown between Crenshaw and Hawthorne. Now, staff is studying alternatives of 450 and 375 units — the EIR for those proposals might not hit the streets until the end of this year.
In the meantime, councilmen Addleman and Zuckerman say a moratorium is necessary because officials don’t know, among other things, the scope of traffic relief necessary, the cost of developer fees and the outcome of a revised air-quality study. To date, officials have approved four mixed-use developments and 133 units.
“A moratorium provides an additional level of assurance to the public. Until we know what the project is, we need to advise [developers] that they’re going to be entering a very uncertain outcome,” Zuckerman said. “I think we need to take a timeout.”
“If we let people go ahead with their applications … they’ll feel they’re entitled,” Addleman said. “What’s the rush? Put the moratorium in.”
City attorney Kristin Pelletier cautioned that there is case law stating cities must continue to process developers’ applications and go forward with the EIR procedure. “You can’t simply say, ‘Here’s a moratorium; we’re not going to process anything,’” she said.
Also, there must be a “clear and immediate threat” to public health, safety or welfare to initiate a moratorium, Pelletier added.
According to Zuckerman, air quality alone is cause for a moratorium. “There’s certainly more than a reasonable basis,” he said.
“I have not seen an air-quality case … and I think I have looked at all the cases,” Pelletier said. “If we’re going to adopt a moratorium, we have to tie that to some study we’re doing to amend the general plan. You can’t just do it in a vacuum.”
“With respect to the findings, it’s a difficult hurdle when you’re talking about health, safety and welfare,” said City Manager Doug Prichard. “There is a good public-relations reason to seriously consider a moratorium … The council, I believe, could make a reasoned, thoughtful conclusion that a moratorium is in the best interest of the community.”
Prichard doubted the city would face serious legal challenges if officials were to enact a six-month suspension to study the project further. “If there was ever a time to consider a moratorium, I think it is now,” he said.
Councilman Frank Zerunyan, who initially doubted the legality of a moratorium, softened his tone. “I’m perfectly willing to accept the fact that I’m legally wrong,” he said, adding that he would support a halt in development only if it does not come back to “bite” the city. “I don’t care what you call it; I’m a practical person. At the same time, I don’t want to create a legal liability.”
City staff still will process two pending applications, Prichard said. “The moratorium I don’t think harms anybody,” he added.
Said Zerunyan, “I would like a little more certainty.”
“I think this is a relatively untested area,” Pelletier said. “I can’t guarantee you that someone’s not going to walk in and is not going to take issue.”
Alex Rose of Continental Development Corp., which has plans for building downtown, is one of those taking issue with the city’s direction. “It’s a little bit frustrating sitting here,” Rose said. “I’m not sure I can walk out of here with a great deal of certainty as to where the council is headed.”
RHE resident Tom Judge also questioned council’s direction, albeit for a different reason. “Why are you approving all these things individually? Why do you keep approving these things?” Judge asked. “People want to know, Do we know where we’re going? And I don’t think we do … You’re going in the wrong direction.”
“I just think we need to keep the big picture in mind here,” said Councilwoman Judy Mitchell.
For more information about the Peninsula Village Plan, visit the city’s Web site at www.ci.rolling-hills-estates.ca.us, call City Hall at (310) 377-1577 or attend the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 12. Meetings are held in council chambers, located at 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North in RHE.Visit the PV News website at: http://www.pvnews.com/local_news/