INSIDE CITY HALL Here are some of...

INSIDE CITY HALL

Here are some of the items the council decided Monday.

CENTERLINE RAIL SYSTEM

The council approved a change to an agreement between the city and

the Orange County Transportation Authority for preliminary

engineering of the CenterLine light-rail system. That includes the

initial development of precise rail-alignment plans and

station-location details.

Councilmen Allan Mansoor and Mike Scheafer dissented.

The amendment commits the agency to continue paying the city up to

$90,000 for public outreach consulting services. Although the city is

behind CenterLine, not all residents agree it is worthwhile.

WHAT IT MEANS

The transportation authority will pay the city back for services

the city has already spent money on, Mayor Gary Monahan said.

WHAT WAS SAID

“This is not a vote on CenterLine,” Monahan said. “All we do by

turning this down is saying less money for Costa Mesa and not being

able to deal with the stakeholders. I think it’s irresponsible to

reject it.”

MYRAN DRIVE REZONING

The council denied a request to rezone Myran Drive from

multiple-family residential to single-family residential. Myran Drive

is a 25-foot-wide private driveway easement that serves four lots

north of Victoria Street.

Although the drive has been zoned for multiple-family development

since the city was incorporated in 1953, the four lots have had

single-family homes since the early 1950s. A developer recently

acquired two of the lots and has gotten approval to replace the

existing homes with two-story homes.

Under current zoning, each lot could be developed with two units.

But if it were changed, only one unit would be allowed on each lot.

Council members Libby Cowan and Chris Steel dissented.

WHAT IT MEANS

The zoning will stay multiple-family residential, allowing the

developer to build two units on each of the lots he has acquired.

WHAT WAS SAID

“I guarantee you that if we’d approved that, we’d get a lawsuit,

and we’d lose,” Monahan said. “[If approved,] you’re changing the

value of [the developer’s] property in a negative fashion and

changing his ability to build by right in a negative fashion.”

APPEALS PROCESS

The council decided to postpone any decision on this issue until

Sept. 7, when it will look at making the development permit process

more efficient.

The council was set to consider options relating to appeals by the

public and the council on decisions made by the Planning Commission

and other city entities. Among the possibilities are reducing the

cost of appeals and raising the threshold for the council to consider

them.

Cowan dissented.

WHAT IT MEANS

The council will examine this issue on Sept. 7.

WHAT WAS SAID

“I don’t support looking [further] at appeals,” Cowan said. “It’s

a system that’s in place and is working.