Seven-Year Home Remodel Gets New Contractor

    The residents of the Mission Ridge neighborhood have complained repeatedly to City Hall for relief from the nuisance and eyesore of a home remodeling project they say has continued for seven years.   A large portion of the work was done without permits, including a full basement that was excavated under the existing structure. 

    The homeowner requested permission to build an 18-car underground garage a few months ago, but the application was denied by the Planning Commission and the City Council.  The home has above ground garages for 8 cars, according to neighbors, and the house has grown to over 9,000 square feet.

    The architect for the project told the City Council on Monday that the property owner is now doing modifications necessary to receive “as-built” permits.  The current owner purchased the home from a general contractor who initiated most of the work, then tried to complete unfinished plans for the buyer.  On Monday a new contractor told the Council the previous owner/contractor, Mr. Holt, had been told to leave the property.  Mr. Holt has lived at the property since the sale, and a neighbor reported seeing him still on the site. 

    The Council was also told the property owner, Mr. Le, may decide not to use the home as his family’s permanent residence, due to the turmoil in the neighborhood.  If Le tried to sell the property, given the history, it begs the question whether there would there be any potential buyers; perhaps the previous owner, Mr. Holt?

    The new contractor provided a timeline and assured the City the work would be completed by September, after Councilmember Kelley agendized the issue for consideration of legal remedies.  The Council instructed Staff to soon provide an inventory of work done at the property, and directed the City Attorney to review the legal issues involved. 

    Several neighbors asked the Council to put themselves in their shoes.  One woman invited the Council to stay at her adjacent home for five days to appreciate the nightmare nearby residents are experiencing.  The residents have expressed dissatisfaction with the Staff and Council for allowing the situation to continue for so long.  A well-known local real estate agent chided the council, saying that before the City was incorporated, the Mission Viejo Company would never have tolerated such behavior.

Read Full Post »

Underground Garage Denied; But Nightmare Continues

    Residents in upscale Mission Ridge felt relief last November when the City Council denied a neighbor’s application for an 18-car underground garage.  The applicant didn’t bring a timely lawsuit against the denial, as supposed, so the community hoped several years of construction at the property would conclude.

    Last Monday the residents went before the Council six months complaining the City wasn’t abating the noise and nuisance from continuing construction.  They brought photos showing heavy equipment working on the property, contending the work being done could not conform with any permits approved by the City.  Over the years the home has been expanded to over 9,000 square feet, including a non-permitted full basement. 

    City officials argue they are simply working with the homeowner to bring former projects within City code so that after-the-fact permits (as-built permits) can be issued.   Community Services Director Chuck Wilson told the Council building official Dennis Bogle has been on the site on a regular and persistent basis to observe the construction process.

    Residents say they haven’t gotten answers, however, about work being done in areas where no active permit was approved.  They feel entitled to see plans, not yet provided, to show the path of an emergency egress being tunneled from the basement, for example.  They contend equipment is working on the public right of way without an encroachment permit.  According to close-by residents, work was performed on March 30 that didn’t receive a permit until April. 

    Wilson told neighbors the City couldn’t control the size or quantity of equipment on the property, but neighbors say a heavy equipment present for several weeks is suspicious because of past practices and because it does not match the alleged purpose of trenching a 4″ sewer pipe and electrical conduit.  That activity has been going on for six weeks, they say. An adjacent homeowner has experienced an underground water leak coinciding with the use of the heavy equipment.

    The City Attorney advised that although construction may seem acceptable on a piecemeal basis, the City was not without remedies if, on an overall basis, the action constituted a significant nuisance.  The item was brought by neighbors in public comments, so the City wasn’t prepared with an agendized response.  Mr. Wilson told the neighbors his department would investigate and provide replies to their unanswered questions by Friday.

Read Full Post »

Residents Upset: Council Has Second Thoughts

    On Monday evening the City Council majority will reconsider some of its recent decisions.  Each of the decisions generated critical comments from readers of the Mission Viejo Dispatch. 

    Last month the Council gave approval for City staff to proceed with contract documents plus the solicitation of bids for 13-foot tall kiosks and new signs along Oso Creek Trail.  Now Frank Ury is proposing the issue instead be referred to the Community Services Commission (CSC) for review.  CSC Chairman Brian Skalsky publicly disagreed with the Council’s decision on the kiosks, noting his Commission had not been consulted.

    The CSC review would include a) alignment of kiosk/signage plans with goals for Oso Creek, b) financial benefits, c) overall design, and d) possible re-tasking of funds should Commission prefer different improvements.  The kiosk plan was opposed by Councilwoman Schlicht.  Trail users objected to invading and diluting the natural environment along the Creek.

    It was notable the agenda’s history summary for the upcoming item does not list the 4-1 vote taken in favor of the kiosks on April 6.  It is unknown whether the incomplete report was inadvertent or whether the omission was intended to suppress attention to the action taken last month without a CSC report.

    Trish Kelley is simultaneously proposing a retreat on other items.  She is recommending the Council defer action on three previously approved Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs): 1) the renovation of the Marguerite Tennis Center, 2) the renovation of the locker rooms at the Montanoso Recreation Center, and 3) improvements at Pavion Park, stating:

The Community Services Commission is working on a Master Plan for the Marguerite Recreation Center Complex. would like to see the various elements of these projects broken out so that they may be considered individually and possibly incrementally. Each of our planned CIPs for 2009 are projects that can be postponed until further research has been completed, and the economy improves.

   The Council significantly depleted the City’s unallocated reserves when it approved the CIP projects a few months ago.  It is unclear whether Kelley is recommending those funds be returned to unallocated reserves until City revenues recover. 

    In April Kelley made an approved motion for the City Treasurer to transfer $4 million out of previously designated funds, and into unallocated reserves.  That transfer would technically satisfy City policy that unallocated reserves be at least 15% of City revenues.  If the Council returns the money from the 3 CIPs, the action would preclude the need for a ‘rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul’ transfer.   If Kelley does not intend to return the funds, it raises questions whether her semantical “deferral” is merely political window dressing. 

    Last month Kelley triggered another reversal.  She revisited and rejected the Council’s ULI report, an inquiry into high density development for the Mission Viejo Village Center at LaPaz and Marguerite.  The ULI report, poised over the City for the past two years, proposed multi-story mixed used development, including over 300 residences for that shopping center.

    The recent rush to clean up unpopular decisions is unusual, but may indicate concern about public backlash illustrated by a successful recent petition to place the Right-To-Vote Zoning Initiative on a ballot, and another petition currently circulating to recall Councilman Lance MacLean.

Read Full Post »

Drive Thru Sno-Cone Shop

    Mark and Laura Wright plan to convert a former drive thru coffee kiosk to a Sno-Cone business called  of ‘Sno-On-The-Go’.  The shop is located next to a Shell service station at Los Alisos and Jeronimo.

    No change is proposed to the building, but there would be some minor modification to the parking lot surrounding the kiosk to accommodate some seating and fencing for the business. Approximately 460 sq. ft. on the west side of the kiosk will be converted into patio seating surrounded by planters and fencing.

    Several coffee proprietors have gone out of business at the kiosk.  Questions were raised when the kiosk was originally approved by the City because it removed parking capacity.  Proprietors in the Center have complained that day laborers gather unabated at the entrances to the Plaza, discouraging patrons.

Read Full Post »

Residential Day Care Petition

A petition was submitted on April 20 by Shahdokht Karimianpour to operate a large family day care home at 12 Rimani Drive in a residential neighborhood. The City plans to approve the request administratively, without review by the Planning Commission.

Read Full Post »

Owner Seeks Demolition Of Gas Station

    BP West Coast Products is seeking Planning Commission approval to demolish its existing gas station at 27682 Crown Valley Parkway. The plan would replace the current structure with a new ARCO AM/PM convenience store with 8 pumps.

    The application is seeking an exception permitting less setback from the property line than required under City Code. The station would be 2,400 square feet in size with a 3,180 square foot canopy.

    A permit for 24-hour operation and the on-site sale of beer and wine is requested.

    The item is scheduled for review by Design Review Committee at 9 am on April 30 at City Hall, and tentatively scheduled for a full Commission meeting in May.

Read Full Post »

Amnesia, Delusion, Or Lies? The Kelley-Ury ULI Story

    At a Special Council Meeting on February 24, Trish Kelley denied the council ever had any interest in pursuing a high-density mixed-use development policy for the Mission Viejo Village Center at LaPaz and Marguerite. Kelley has been blaming the media for lingering concern about a 2007 report from the Urban Land Institute (ULI), a consortium of developers.

    “We all said thanks, but no thanks [upon receiving the ULI report],” she said.

    The approved minutes of the meeting, and remarks by council members after the 2007 ULI presentation, belie Kelley’s rendition. They also contradict Frank Ury’s statements that it was simply a “receive and file” item and “no action was taken.”  Is it amnesia, delusion, faulty memory, or fabrication?

    At the urging of at least one council member, Frank Ury, ULI was retained by the City to prepare a plan to redevelop Village Center. The ULI report to the Council on June 19, 2007 provided a concept to bulldoze the Center and create a multi-story project of retail and office space, topped by 325 residential units.

    In conjunction with other actions by the Council, the high density plan alarmed residents. Residents subsequently circulated an Initiative petition which would give voters review over major rezoning actions. The successful petition, with over 8,000 signatures, was certified by the Registrar of Voters for a future ballot.

    Spurred by that public outrage, Kelley made her infamous, “Thanks, but no thanks” denial in February. Last Monday she went a step further to absolve the council (agenda report), asking her colleagues, “as a matter of history,” and “to reaffirm the denial of housing,”  that the Council formally vote against the ULI concept. So after hanging for 1 year plus 10 months, and after a Zoning Initiative qualified for a ballot, the ULI Report was unanimously rejected.

    Councilwoman Cathy Schlicht immediately replied she was going to “expose the misinformation” from Kelley.  She then read the following Minutes for that item from the June 19, 2007 meeting.  It  describes an action which is typical for proceeding with a project:

“By consensus, the City Council directed staff to develop recommendations for the next steps and return to the City Council in late August or early September.”

    During the discussion, Schlicht also asked the Council and staff what took place after the June action.  She inquired if dialogue was conducted with Village Center property owners after receiving the ULI report, saying, “Maybe it was the property owners who said ‘thanks but no thanks’, not the Council.”  No one answered Schlicht.  Later in the discussion she repeated the same question.  Again, the silence was deafening.

    Following are excerpts of comments by council members at the 2007 meeting, following the ULI presentation:

Gail Reavis: “What do we want to do next – do we want to have you (the ULI) back to ask questions, do we want to receive and file, what do we want to do with this? How do you feel about this….not to wrap it up but at least know how we stand…”

Frank Ury: “. . . we don’t have to discuss it tonight, but I think the council needs to put its effort behind this process to see exactly where this could go.”

Frank Ury: “. . . the exciting part for me was taking a look at the renderings . . .”

Frank Ury: “. . . people are looking at us here to take a leadership role here and I think we should do what we can to move on with that.”

Trish Kelley: “. . . definitely like the idea of going forward with this task force . . .”

Trish Kelley: “. . . there is potential here . . .”

Trish Kelley: “I really like the idea of the trolley concept here . . .”

Trish Kelley: “. . . apprehensive about the thought of residential, but I would like to see a task force formed to go ahead and continue looking at this and again get the feedback from our economic development consultant . . .”

John Paul Ledesma: ” . . . price would be too high, in my opinion, in terms of adding the residential component here . . .”

John Paul Ledesma: “. . . residential component is not a match for the rest of the community.”

Lance MacLean: “I guess it is tough to follow John Paul because I feel exactly opposite of that . . .”

Lance MacLean: “. . . I don’t have a lot of heartburn over the concept of housing in that location, understanding of course from where I sit, for the residents that do, if you don’t like it, don’t live there.”

Lance MacLean: “I would like to compliment the ULI for the work they put into this, the suggestions they have. I would like to continue on, though with the suggestion of a couple of my colleagues, and go ahead and form a working group to continue to look at what opportunities might exist, what the property owners might want to do if anything, and see what our next steps are . . .”

    The full 2007 ULI presentation and council comments, in context, can be viewed by clicking here and then “jumping to” Item 1: Urban Land Institute.

Read Full Post »

Letter: Biz Vacancies Show Value Of RTV Initiative

An Initiative to allow voter approval for major land-use changes in Mission Viejo, which has been cleared for a future ballot, is looking better and better as a way to apply some basic marketing sense to property development.

The latest report on Orange County retail vacancies show strip malls catering to everyday consumer needs are suffering in the recession less than half as much as “specialty” centers with upscale stores like boutiques that rely on discretionary spending. That’s an unsurprising trend throughout the economy.

The Register reported April 22 that real estate broker CB Richard Ellis found “specialty” centers in Orange County had the highest vacancy rate (10.4 percent) and strip malls had the lowest rate (4.4 percent). Vacancies are climbing countywide.

With public outrage mounting, Mission Viejo Council members Lance MacLean, Trish Kelly and Frank Ury couldn’t run fast enough from their proposal to convert the strip malls at La Paz and Marguerite into specialty centers with apartments on top of upscale stores and restaurants. However, I could not get a clear answer from the planning commission or staff on whether the project is dead. This unhealthy limbo would be resolved by a public vote.

As I understand it, the Right to Vote Initiative would allow orderly development under existing zoning which preserves the city master plan for a low-density residential community, putting businesses offering everyday goods and services close by.

Allan Pilger

Read Full Post »

Council Wouldn’t Approve Initiative; Will Go To Voters

     Although the issue took an hour of discussion, the outcome of the Council’s vote Monday night on the Right To Vote Initiative became obvious within the first ten seconds of discussion, following a motion by Lance MacLean. 

    Observers already surmised John Paul Ledesma and Cathy Schlicht favored the Initiative, and the Council could have adopted the measure without requiring a public vote, saving time and election costs.  Lance MacLean and Trish Kelley, however, pounced on the agenda item with a different motion.  MacLean and Kelley immediately made and seconded a motion, respectively, to instead refer the Initiative to a public election.  Ledesma and Schlicht did not challenge the motion nor suggest the Council immediately adopt the Initiative, perhaps because they felt it was futile.  That foretold the final 5-0 vote to put the matter on the next general election ballot.

    If the MUK majority disfavors the Initiative, as some of their questions and comments indicated, they are aware outside builders’ associations, developers and lobbyists have conducted expensive campaigns in other cities to defeat similar initiatives.  Those commercial entities stand to profit significantly from high density zoning which allows more construction on less land.  Although the deep-pocket campaigns were unsuccessful in Newport Beach and Yorba Linda, they remain a serious threat to grassroots efforts to control density.

    The City Attorney had posed options for the Council to legally contest the voters’ Initiative or to force voters to sue the Council to achieve a ballot measure for the Initiative, but those alternatives were not considered, perhaps due to potential political ramifications.

    The next general election available for the Initiative is scheduled for June 8, 2010.

Read Full Post »

Council Considers Voter Initiative Tonight

    The City Council will consider the Right to Vote Initiative at its meeting tonight (Monday).  Under state law the Council may adopt the Initiative as an ordinance, or it may send the Initiative to an election ballot where voters would decide whether to adopt it as a MV ordinance.

    The Initiative, if adopted, would require voters to ratify major changes to Mission Viejo’s land use zoning.  It is designed to prevent urbanization caused when residential, commercial, recreational and open space is rezoned for high density development, unless approved by voters.  The intent is to preserve Mission Viejo’s Master Plan.

    The City Attorney seemed to confirm the potential effectiveness of the Initiative.  He said, “The net effect . . . is that few land use changes will be advanced and the status quo regarding the present allocation of land uses will be preserved.”

    One exception is minimum state requirements for affordable housing.  State law preempts voters from preventing the rezoning of land sufficient for attainment of minimum state allotments of affordable units, so the Initiative necessarily provides an exception in that situation.

    Observers believe the Council majority of MacLean, Ury and Kelley may be seeking a way to jettison the Initiative.  On the agenda the City Attorney carved out two additional alternatives for the Council.  One would be for the Council to bring a lawsuit to have the Initiative declared unconstitutional or invalid.  The other would be for the Council to do nothing, forcing voters to sue the City to put the Initiative on a ballot.

    The Initiative was modeled after one adopted by Yorba Linda voters a couple years ago.  The City Attorney also noted the voters of the City of Monterey adopted an ordinance “in an almost identical initiative.”  Newport Beach voters also passed a similar measure known as the Greenlight Intiative.  The City Councils in those cities sent the intiatives to election ballots for voter determination.

    The City Attorney and City Staff have not made a similar recommendation in Mission Viejo, however.  That may be an ominous sign that they are “counting to three,” assuming the majority of the Council opposes voter oversight of their rezoning actions.  In that atmosphere, the City Attorney and Staff could try to help the Council majority move against sending the Initiative to voters.

Read Full Post »

Mayor Ury Still Flirting With Urbanists

    On April 16 Mayor Ury can be found from 7:30am to 9:30am at an Urban Land Institute (ULI) meeting in the First American Title Company Building in Santa Ana, according to ULI.  The affair also includes the Mayors of Orange, Tustin, and Laguna Niguel to discuss regional planning and redevelopment.

    The event will not be a free public forum.  Residents are required to pay a registration fee up to $75 to attend.  

    The moderator will be Christine Iger of Iger and Associates, a lobbying firm.  The current registered attendees, listed below, appear to be potential beneficiaries of high-intensity zoning and development:

Trammell Crow Company

Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Eng.

NUVIS Landscape Architecture and Planning

Thomas P. Cox Architects, Inc.

RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Fehr & Peers

JZMK Partners

Glumac

Mary Erickson Community Housing

Geocon Inland Empire

Environmental Construction Group

TRC

 

    ULI states, “The members of the ULI are community builders.”

 

    Last month, facing a voter Initiative, Councilwoman Trish Kelley denied the Council majority was interested in urbanizing Mission Viejo with higher density development.  The issue has hung over the City since a study was commissioned from the Urban Land Institute two years ago.  Councilman Frank Ury was instrumental in initiating involvement by ULI in Mission Viejo.

    Ury wanted ULI to provide a plan to reconstruct the shopping center at LaPaz and Marguerite, across from the MV Library. ULI’s report recommended a radical plan to bulldoze the center and replace it with a multi-story complex.  Office space and 350-450 housing units would be constructed on top of retail and commercial facilites under the ULI plan.

    The ULI urbanization plan was one of the factors giving rise to the MV Right to Vote Initiative.  The Citizen Initiative garnered over eight thousand signatures from MV voters, making it eligible as a ballot measure. If passed, the Initiative would require voter approval of major City rezoning actions.

     The Initiative will be considered by the Council next Monday.  The Council can approve the measure on its own or send it to a general election ballot.  Comments from the City Attorney have raised suspicions some Councilmembers may dislike the prospect of voter oversight.  It therefore seems likely some legal basis may be created for rejecting the Initiative.

Read Full Post »

Letter: “Thanks, But No Thanks”

Readers of online MV publications are keeping up on events at Mission Viejo City Hall and taking their concerns to council members. As a result the overriding theme of the March 2 council meeting was “Thanks, but no thanks.”

First, City Manager Dennis Wilberg reported he will notify the Tournament of Roses Committee that the city will decline an invitation to field a float in the 2010 parade. Thanks, but no thanks. The city tried to ballyhoo the $360,000 float as a taxpayer investment in community spirit. But community outrage overcame hype from city hall and the Orange County Register about the supposed success of the project.

That March 2 City Council meeting was also used by Council members Frank Ury and Lance MacLean trying to refute blog articles.

They appeared to contradict Council Member Trish Kelley. She attempted at the prior council meeting to expose “False statements running rampant, that the council wants to bulldoze the shopping center (at La Paz and Marguerite) and build any kind of housing on top of businesses, are scare tactics. “We all said thanks but no thanks” (upon receiving an Urban Land Institute report on mixed-use development),” she said. 

“Thanks, but no thanks,” certainly indicates both a council decision against the report, and conveying a decision to ULI or the property owners. Ury and MacLean said the city never took such a vote, but merely received and filed the report. Kelley happened to be absent that night.

 If the bloggers had been making these “false statements” for about two years, why wait until now to try to refute them? Kelley also said any renovation plans would be very hard to coordinate with 13 different property owners within the center. Maybe it was the property owners who said, “Thanks, but no thanks” to URI’s social engineering.

By another Ury comment, the city essentially is saying “Thanks, but no thanks” to proposed high-density development of the Casta Del Sol Golf Course. The blogs, though, have been reporting that an extended moratorium on development of open land can be overturned with a majority council vote should the economy improve.

Finally, Ury once again tried to assure the community the city is on sound financial ground with healthy reserves, comparing favorably to other California cities. But first San Juan Capistrano and now Rancho Santa Margarita have acknowledged deficits and are cutting costs to stay in balance. Quarterly financials published in the Dispatch show Mission Viejo continues to spend more than it takes in, like saying “thanks, but no thanks” to fiscal discipline.

Allan Pilger

Read Full Post »

Initiative: City Hall Remains Hostile

    City officials remain hostile to the Right To Vote Initiative, claiming its certification by the OC Registrar does not mean it will be placed on a ballot.  City Hall announced that Registrar Neil Kelley certified the petition, but quickly added, “This does not mean that the ordinance will be adopted or set for election.”

    The City confirmed 8,327 signatures were verified, 2,000 more than necessary to qualify for a regular election ballot.  If approved by the Council or voters, the initiative would become an ordinance requiring voter approval for zoning action which does any of the following:

a.  Increases the number of residential units that may be constructed on a parcel designated for residential uses.
b.  Increases the number of separate parcels which may be created from an existing parcel.
c.  Changes any residential land use to allow any other land use.
d.  Changes any non-residential land use to allow any residential land use greater than six and one-half (6.5) net dwelling units per acre.
e.  Changes any non-residential land use to allow a mix of commercial and residential uses.
f.   Provides for the private development of land owned by a government entity within five years of the date of the approval to
develop the land.
g.  Repeals any of the Planning Policy Documents.
h.  Changes any commercial or industrial land use to allow any other land use, if the aggregate size of all the parcels being changed exceeds 2 acres.
i.  Changes any open space land use to allow any other land use.
j.  Changes any recreation land use to allow any other land use except open space.

    The goal of the signers of the petition is to deter high density development in Mission Viejo unless approved by voters. An exception to voter approval is provided by the Initiative if State housing law pre-empts local voters from deciding an issue.  State court decisions have in some instances stopped voters from preventing local compliance with California goals for low income housing.  

    The Council can decide whether to approve the measure itself or send it to voters on an election ballot.  After the petition was originally submitted to the City Clerk a few weeks ago, the City Attorney suggested another strategy.  He indicated legal research might lead to a ‘theory’ upon which to ignore the initiative and keep it off a ballot, even though the measure is modeled after an existing ordinance in Yorba Linda.  The council authorized attorney fees for that purpose.

Read Full Post »

MV Land Use Initiative Certified By Registrar

    City Clerk Karen Hamman informed the Dispatch Friday that the Right To Vote Land Use Initiative was qualified by the County Registrar, Neil Kelley.  The Initiative would give voters a role in approving or disapproving major zoning changes to larger parcels of land in Mission Viejo.

    The purpose of the proposal is to deter the urbanization of Mission Viejo by developers seeking zoning changes that would permit high density construction projects.

    The grassroots petition required signatures from 10% of city voters, or 6,142.  The petition was delivered by the City Clerk to the Registrar with 1o,995 signatures.  The Registrar’s office found that 8,372 signatures were valid, exceeding the requirement by over 2,000.

    The initiative will next go to the City Council.  It can decided to approve the measure without and election or put it on the next regular election ballot.  City Hall inherently doesn’t like its power impaired by such initiatives, and the City Attorney recently hinted he may be trying to create a legal argument for blocking the initiative. 

Read Full Post »

Kelley Denies Urban Concept For Village Center

    At Tuesday’s Special Council meeting Councilwoman Trish Kelley made a statement denying City Hall was considering the creation of a mixed use development for the Mission Viejo Village Center at LaPaz and Marguerite.

    She was referring to a study commissioned by City Hall in early 2007.  A subsequent report by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) found, in order to “pencil out,” redevelopment of the Stein Mart shopping center would require a multi-story approach with housing on top of commercial space.  

    “False statements running rampant, that the Council wants to bulldoze the shopping center and build any kind of housing on top of businesses, are scare tactics,” Kelley said.  “We all said thanks, but no thanks [upon receiving the ULI report].”

    Kelley did not identify a meeting when the council took action rejecting the ULI concept.  The Dispatch is unaware of any council meeting where such a vote or decision was disclosed.

    Kelley also said any renovation plan would be extremely difficult to coordinate because there are 13 different property owners within the Center.

Read Full Post »