|
Community
DANA POINT-Down but never out, the City of Dana Point may be reconsidering
its hard-nosed treatment of the owners of the Headlands property.
At its last meeting the City Council approved expanding its budget
for the Headlands business, bringing the total to approximately
$1 million for this fiscal year. The majority of this increase
being attributed to Community Development's insistence on litigation
against property owners, in particular the owners of the Dana
Point headlands, Headlands Reserve LLC. Now that the conflict
has heated up, and the City has lost a round or two in court,
and the costs are accumulating, the City Council is getting heat
for allowing Community Development to "wag the dog."
The Headlands property has been without a specific plan since
Save the Headlands, a local grass roots organization that originally
formed around opposition to Community Development's Redevelopment
plans, caused a public referendum in 1994 to overturn that agency's
original plan for 370 homes and a 400-room hotel on the scale
of the Ritz Carlton, on the Point. Because the City has no existing,
valid plan for the site, and because it has refused to accept
the owners' plans even for review, the City lost a round in court,
which it now wants to get around by amending the General Plan.
But the costs of Community Developments' relentless war against
the owners of the Headlands has started to get attention on its
own, bringing public pressure to bear on the cost-conscious City
Council. Last year the City created a plan that would include
a 100 to 150-room hotel on the Strand Beach area, with 185 homes
and about 65 acres of open space. However, this was not done according
to state law, by amending the General Plan.
The landowners, Headlands Reserve, LLC, have a plan for 261 homes,
with a fall back position of 206 homes, on larger lots, a 75-room
spa, and 55 acres of open space, including 8.2 acres of visitor/commercial
area that would include a lighthouse and a veterans' memorial.
The City's refusal to even review the landowners' plans, especially
without plans for the site in the General Plan, caused the City
to lose in court on the issue, forcing the City to appeal, resulting
in increased litigation costs. Of course, the prideful City Council
will never admit that it took bad advice from staff, which is
to say the Community Development department. "My position
is that what we have done up until this time is correct. We have
been fulfilling the wishes of the people who elected us,"
says Councilman Harold Kaufman, who has never hesitated to speak
on behalf of the people of Dana Point, even when a substantial
number wanted to remove him from office.
Mr. Kaufman added that he did not support the Council's decision
to appeal to the Supreme Court because he said that there was
probably less than a 5% chance of the case being heard, "It's
a waste of about $10,000. I think it's time for us to sit down
and see if there is some plan we can agree on." The ex-mayor
of Dana Point agrees, indicating his readiness to submit the dispute
between the City of Dana Point and the headlands owners to mediation.
William Ossenmacher said, "I would hope we could reach a
satisfactory resolution to this problem. This has been an issue
that's been divisive in our community for too long." The
fact that the exposure of the costs may have influenced public
opinion has not been publicly acknowledged by any of the members
of the City Council.
The owners of the headlands, for their part, have shown a degree
of willingness to negotiate. "All we ask is for a level playing
field," said Kevin Darnell, vice president of Headlands Reserve,
LLC. Darnell said that during mediation the City must agree not
to pursue a general plan amendment which would lower the potential
number of housing units. On the other hand, litigation, including
the appeal by the City of a court order that Community Development
stop processing its own plan and start to process the property
owners' plan, and an appeal to the California Supreme Court, would
be suspended.
The property owner would allow the City to stop processing its
plan and would not use any part of the mediation and the length
of time it takes in any potential lawsuits regarding a taking
of property rights by the City. Both sides to the dispute said
that due to the current lawsuits they cannot say much about the
ongoing mediation negotiations, but terms that have come to public
notice is that a mediation panel may be formed, with each side
allowed to appoint one member of the public to sit on it. Early
information makes it appear that the City may choose the City's
representative from the Save the Headlands group. "I'm optimistic that once some of our most vocal opponents really spend some time and try to understand what we are trying to accomplish they will, if not support us, at least not oppose us," said Sanford Edward, president of Headlands Reserve, LLC. Mr. Edward indicated that he had met with key members of Save the Headlands, even though members of that group are on the record as being strongly opposed to the developers' plans. "We're willing to change significant components of our plan to the point where it would take a general plan amendment," Edward continued. "We can't do that unless there is a window of opportunity to resolve this in a civil and least costly manner." SOURCE: Information for this article was derived from the Dana Point News, 18 February, 1999, from an article entitled, "Headlands, A Thawing Hovers," by Dennis Kaiser. |
RETURN TO DANA POINT ON-LINE NEWS INDEX |