City Ventures has won another battle in the now four-year struggle with the Moraga community to build 36 townhomes at 221 Moraga Way.
The town council put its seal of approval on the end of the second step - part of Moraga's three step approval process - of the Moraga Center Homes development after it had stalled at the planning commission. A majority of the council members reasoned that the general plan in front of them complied with the conceptual plan they had previously approved and that it was their legal obligation to proceed.
Several legal arguments were raised to challenge the approval of the plan. Many residents have voiced their dislike of the project and 1,500 people signed a petition challenging it. But the town is legally required to review the plan because, as Mayor Mike Metcalf said, it is bound by the law and not at liberty to change rules discretionarily.
Opponents to the project understood it well. Planning Commissioner Kymberleigh Korpus had written a detailed argument to the council that reflected her legal take on the issue (see www.lamorindaweekly.com/archive/issue1008/Moraga-Center-Homes-Plan-Grilled-by-Commission.html). To make sure that legal matters would be properly addressed, the town had asked attorney Michelle Kenyon to attend the meeting.
One argument is that this project should be subjected to residential development rules and not mixed-use (office and residential) rules as it had been indicated from the start. Staff acknowledged that the Moraga Center Specific Plan (MCSP) that rules the Moraga Center Homes property was not specific regarding that question. However, it is standard planning practice that parcels be ruled by their original designation and not their final use.
The arguments regarding the lack of conformity with the neighborhood and its "bulkiness" along a scenic corridor were rejected because the developer has already made substantial changes to accommodate all of the various requirements asked for by design review board and planning commission.
Resident Jay Tanner noted that the requirements of the MCSP environmental impact report require further setback and more building separation than this development has. He was told that these rules do not apply to each project individually, but to the totality of the plan and that it has been determined that the plan as a whole is compliant with the EIR.
Several residents said they believe that this project is not compliant with several aspects of the General Plan. The issue here is that the MCSP has been found compliant to the plan. Challenging this compliance would be a completely different process.
Korpus had also argued that the review of the conceptual plan was a de novo hearing, meaning from the ground up. Kenyon disagreed, confirming that the only question the council should answer was whether this second stage of the approval process was compliant with what they had been required during the first phase.
"The council does not have the power to unilaterally amend the CDP (conceptual plan) at this stage," she said.
Ten residents spoke at the meeting, seven against the project and three in favor.
Councilmember Phil Arth simply stated that he had been convinced by the staff report and that he would approve the project. Vice mayor Dave Trotter confirmed his support of the MCSP that he helped develop and approve five years ago along with Metcalf, and they both supported the view that this stage of the planning process should only deal with the compliance with the previous one.
Councilmember Teresa Onoda had already voiced her reticence during the approval of the conceptual map of the Moraga Center Homes and opposed it this time around. Councilmember Roger Wykle also opposed the plan, indicating that there were elements that could have been improved at this stage, but he was not followed by other council members.
City staff members noted that the project now requires three additional approvals from the town: the Precise Development Plan, Final Design Review and Final Subdivision Map.
The town council put its seal of approval on the end of the second step - part of Moraga's three step approval process - of the Moraga Center Homes development after it had stalled at the planning commission. A majority of the council members reasoned that the general plan in front of them complied with the conceptual plan they had previously approved and that it was their legal obligation to proceed.
Several legal arguments were raised to challenge the approval of the plan. Many residents have voiced their dislike of the project and 1,500 people signed a petition challenging it. But the town is legally required to review the plan because, as Mayor Mike Metcalf said, it is bound by the law and not at liberty to change rules discretionarily.
Opponents to the project understood it well. Planning Commissioner Kymberleigh Korpus had written a detailed argument to the council that reflected her legal take on the issue (see www.lamorindaweekly.com/archive/issue1008/Moraga-Center-Homes-Plan-Grilled-by-Commission.html). To make sure that legal matters would be properly addressed, the town had asked attorney Michelle Kenyon to attend the meeting.
One argument is that this project should be subjected to residential development rules and not mixed-use (office and residential) rules as it had been indicated from the start. Staff acknowledged that the Moraga Center Specific Plan (MCSP) that rules the Moraga Center Homes property was not specific regarding that question. However, it is standard planning practice that parcels be ruled by their original designation and not their final use.
The arguments regarding the lack of conformity with the neighborhood and its "bulkiness" along a scenic corridor were rejected because the developer has already made substantial changes to accommodate all of the various requirements asked for by design review board and planning commission.
Resident Jay Tanner noted that the requirements of the MCSP environmental impact report require further setback and more building separation than this development has. He was told that these rules do not apply to each project individually, but to the totality of the plan and that it has been determined that the plan as a whole is compliant with the EIR.
Several residents said they believe that this project is not compliant with several aspects of the General Plan. The issue here is that the MCSP has been found compliant to the plan. Challenging this compliance would be a completely different process.
Korpus had also argued that the review of the conceptual plan was a de novo hearing, meaning from the ground up. Kenyon disagreed, confirming that the only question the council should answer was whether this second stage of the approval process was compliant with what they had been required during the first phase.
"The council does not have the power to unilaterally amend the CDP (conceptual plan) at this stage," she said.
Ten residents spoke at the meeting, seven against the project and three in favor.
Councilmember Phil Arth simply stated that he had been convinced by the staff report and that he would approve the project. Vice mayor Dave Trotter confirmed his support of the MCSP that he helped develop and approve five years ago along with Metcalf, and they both supported the view that this stage of the planning process should only deal with the compliance with the previous one.
Councilmember Teresa Onoda had already voiced her reticence during the approval of the conceptual map of the Moraga Center Homes and opposed it this time around. Councilmember Roger Wykle also opposed the plan, indicating that there were elements that could have been improved at this stage, but he was not followed by other council members.
City staff members noted that the project now requires three additional approvals from the town: the Precise Development Plan, Final Design Review and Final Subdivision Map.
Reach the reporter at:
Lamorinda Weekly, Moraga CA