Planners’ Vote Could Bar Most Development, Officials in Irvine Say

A moratorium on most development in Irvine could result if a 3-2 Planning Commission vote on one key project is allowed to stand, city officials said Monday.

The city commission decided Nov. 6 that a 1982 environmental impact report that has been used to justify other development in Irvine was inadequate for Dallas-based Trammell Crow Co.’s plan to build 1.5 million square feet of new office space near Fluor Corp.’s headquarters.

While delaying final action until Thursday night, the commission tentatively rejected Trammell Crow’s offer of the 1982 environmental impact report on the Irvine Business Complex near John Wayne Airport, which would mean further environmental study would be required.

Report Used Repeatedly

The Irvine Business Complex report has been used repeatedly to justify other nearby development, including the Irvine Co.’s 4,000-unit residential project in an area called West Park between the San Diego Freeway and Barranca Road.

The commission delayed final action on the matter to draft the exact language needed to comply with state environmental regulations, which require the panel to make new “findings of fact” to support rejection of the EIR.

Planning Commission member Mary Ann Gaido said Monday she led the effort to reject the environmental report because it was based on assumptions that traffic generated by the office development would be alleviated by specific routes and designs for the planned San Joaquin Hills Freeway and other transportation projects.

The viability of those routes and designs is now in doubt, said Gaido, because of questions about the availability of funding and the position of the new City Council majority, which opposes construction of the new freeway unless it is scaled down to resemble a major arterial road.

Monday, pro-growth City Council members Dave Baker and Sally Anne Miller charged that the commission’s Nov. 6 decision would be a “de facto moratorium” on development in many areas of Irvine if it is allowed to stand.

But Baker said Steve Kuhn, his appointee on the commission, made a mistake in voting to declare the EIR inadequate and that Kuhn probably will change his vote Thursday night.

Sees ‘Different Outcome’

Kuhn said he expects “a different outcome” when the commission meets Thursday, but he declined to elaborate.

Gaido said any impact the Nov. 6 vote might have on projects other than Trammell Crow Co.’s “was accidental.”

“That’s not the intent,” Gaido said of the possibility that a moratorium could result from the commission’s action. “The intent is to point out to the public the detrimental effects of the current land-use plan for the whole area. . . . The City Council talks about realignment of the (proposed) Foothill Freeway and lowering the capacity of the San Joaquin Hills Freeway, but it hasn’t done anything to change the land-use plan to conform with its new positions on these projects.”

Gaido is a slow-growth advocate appointed to the commission by Mayor Larry Agran, one of three advocates of slow-growth who took control of the City Council as a result of last June’s city election.

Agran said Monday that, even if the commission’s Nov. 6 vote became final, development would still be possible in areas not specifically included in the EIR now under attack, such as Turtle Rock, Woodbridge and North Woods.

‘Serious Matter

“It’s still a very serious matter,” Agran said. “. . . Obviously, the adequacy of environmental documentation is critical to any city that is serious about planning. . . . The question arises not only if the freeway might not ever be built, but what happens between now and 20 years from now when it might be finally in place. Do we have drastic impacts to existing residential neighborhoods in the meantime?”

Agran and other city officials said the issue of the Trammell Crow EIR is expected to come before the City Council on appeal regardless of what happens at the Planning Commission Thursday night.

Eventually, several council members agreed Monday, the decision will rest with Councilman Ray Catalano, who is one of the council’s three slow-growth members and its swing vote on development issues. Catalano was in Boston Monday and could not be reached for comment.

Trammell Crow Co. spokesman William Lane Jr. said his firm is “concerned.”

“To be honest with you, we were confused at the end of the last (Nov. 6) Planning Commission meeting. . . . It would appear that the commission’s questions are not project specific but rather have to do with the entire IBC (Irvine Business Complex). . . . If that’s true, it certainly affects other projects besides ours.”

And Michael J. LeBlanc, the Irvine Co.’s senior director for government relations, said there is no direct connection between the Trammell Crow project, the EIR for the Irvine Business Complex and the Irvine Co.’s West Park projects.

Many Legal Steps

There are many legally required steps that the city must take before it can actually stop development, LeBlanc said, including the rejection of traffic reduction measures that might be contemplated in supplemental environmental studies.

But LeBlanc added, “If you carry out the scenario as far as it goes logically, then it (the commission action) would be a vote of concern, no doubt about it.”

Trammell Crow Co. purchased Fluor’s 162-acre Irvine headquarters site in 1985 for $340 million and then leased back the facilities to Fluor. The City Council had previously approved Fluor’s plans to expand the facilities but last year claimed that the approval was not transferrable to Trammell Crow Co.

The project now before the Planning Commission involves construction of two 14-story and two 18-story buildings near Jamboree Road and Michelson Drive, and a six-story building and a one-story structure on the same parcel occupied by Fluor Corp.’s headquarters.