|
City of Dana Point
DANA POINT-City Manager John Bahorski explained away the failed
tactic of the City Government as "a long shot," when
speaking of the $10,000 it cost to file the latest appeal. On
Monday, February 22, the City of Dana Point found out that the
California Supreme Court would not grant a stay, or review a December
10, 1998, decision that ordered Community Development (aka, the
Planning Dept.) to stop work on its own plan for the Headlands,
in order to process the plan submitted by the property owner,
Headlands Reserve LLC. "We wanted to pursue all of our legal
remedies to make it clear that we did everything possible."
According to the City Manager, the Supreme Court's 6-1 decision
means the City has only one remaining appeal in the courts that
is still possible.
The last appeal the City can use to delay the Headlands project
asks that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal overturn the Superior
Court's ruling that the City must process the landowner's plan,
instead of the plan designed by the mandarins at Community Development.
Ed Knight, the head honcho over at Community Development, said
that the City Council was within two meetings from voting on a
plan his department had cooked up, an environmental impact report,
and a general plan amendment, when the property owner succeeded
in having the courts pull the plug on the Department's plans.
Headlands Reserve, LLC, which purchased a 50% interest in the
property in May, 1998, argued that the City had no legal right
to create a specific plan and make a general plan amendment at
the same time, and the California courts agreed. Knight said
that Headlands Reserve, LLC's plan does not fit the general plan
in a number of ways, but the real irony exists in the intention
of the Planning Department to devise plans for properties within
the City, with absolutely no communications or input from
the property owners. Kevin Darnell, Headlands Reserve, LLC, vice
president, said that his firm has been advised by legal counsel
that California zoning law allows discrepancies between the general
plan and a specific plan. But the City has another card up its
sleeve, and that is that it may take up to two years for the City's
appeal to be heard, and in the meantime, Knight said, the City
may opt to change its general plan. The Planning Department can,
in effect, bankrupt private property owners by delaying approval
of development plans indefinitely. "If they do, that may
result in a series of other problems," said Allen Droste,
attorney for Headlands Reserve, LLC. "None of these things really constitute a victory," Darnell said. "Possibly they create more impetus for both sides to work together." For the past few weeks, the City and the landowner have discussed entering into a mediation process that would suspend all legal action and related costs. SOURCE: Information for this article was derived from an article from the 25 February, 1999, issue of the Dana Point News, entitled, "City Loses Supreme Court Bid," by Dennis Kaiser. |
RETURN TO DANA POINT ON-LINE NEWS INDEX |