Commentary: Measure Y would give residents real control over planning
In his commentary, “Measure Y is unwise and unneeded,” (Oct. 13) Byron de Arakal makes a number of arguments that need to be answered in the interest of voters understanding what the initiative really does.
To his credit, Mr. De Arakal acknowledges that he’s part of the development industry and works “to build consensus in support of development projects.”
In that light, one should read his commentary as supporting future development projects that — beneficial to a community or not, consistent with the community’s architecture or not, consistent with the community’s infrastructure or not, consistent with the community’s desires or not — always benefit the developer.
Measure Y was written by a group of residents who want citizens to have an active say when the council seeks to change the very look and feel of their community.
The current General Plan Update — adopted 3-2 by the council majority — allows for four- and five-story apartment projects on Harbor and Newport boulevards. In the previous plan, high-density was considered to be 20 units per acre — generally, two-story apartment buildings.
When the plan update came before council, there was overwhelming public input asking it to maintain residential project density consistent with what was allowed by the General Plan then in effect. This council majority chose to ignore that input and include densities of 40 dwelling units/acre (with density bonus allowances, up to 50-plus dwelling units/acre) in the updated plan, more than doubling the size and bulk of many future residential projects.
Mr. de Arakal argues that “it’s a recipe for the stagnation of our tax base, housing stock and our commercial/retail base.” He fails to note:
1. While the tax base would go up with housing stock in the 40-plus units/per acre range, the study conducted by the council showed that any projects over 20 to 30 units/acre would cost the city more in services than the increase in taxes. The result is a net financial loss every year into the future.
2. Measure Y does not require a vote on any project that does not require a General Plan or zoning change. Based on the plan before the current update, more than 4,000 dwelling units could be added to our housing stock without triggering any vote. That’s about a 10% increase in our present housing stock, hardly stagnation.
3. Van’s move to Costa Mesa requires no zoning or General Plan change to meet all administrative and manufacturing needs in their new facilities. Projects of any sort that do not require a change in entitlements — a majority of all new projects — will not be deterred by Measure Y. How does this equate with stagnation?
The notion that citizens who dislike development decisions by the council already have effective remedies is false. Those remedies exist but are, as a matter of practicality, virtually undoable: a referendum requires signatures of 10% of the city’s registered voters (roughly 5,500 signatures) within 30 days of the legislative action, a herculean effort.
Recalls are equally daunting; they require signatures of 15% of the city’s voters. Even with four months to gather them, that is a very expensive and difficult process, and during those months, the council member under recall can still vote on damaging development proposals. With the huge developer funding the council majority can depend on to support their elections, recalling them or even defeating them in regular elections is very difficult.
Finally, any election triggered by Measure Y would occur during a normal municipal election, costing the city little. If the developer wants a special election, Measure Y allows this option, but only if the developer pays all expenses.
Any development that stays within the entitlements allowed in the General Plan will not restrict any of the tools for planning flexibility, will not require a vote, and will not deter development, even if the city allows limited variances that might add some impacts to a project.
Bottom line: Measure Y is an effective and carefully designed strategy to allow Costa Mesa citizens real control over the future of their community. Supporting this measure is the best recipe for sustainable economic growth and a superior quality of life for all our city’s residents.
JAY HUMPHREY is a candidate for City Council.