MISSION VIEJO : Development Freeze Embroils Council

New Mayor Christian W. Keena kicked off his term with a bang Monday as the City Council, meeting for the first time in 1990, wrangled furiously over a proposal to freeze all new development in the city.

Keena had hoped that the year’s first meeting would launch a period of reduced tension among council members, who battled throughout 1989. But Monday’s session dragged on until midnight, and many of the same arguments and divisions that surfaced last year re-emerged.

“My brain’s half dead,” Keena complained as the meeting entered its fourth hour. “This is getting ridiculous.”

Ultimately, the council voted 5-0 to instruct the city staff to review the freeze proposal. First, however, the council rejected a nearly identical motion by a 3-2 vote, confusing some city staffers and members of the audience.

Introduced by Councilman Robert A. Curtis, the proposal is modeled on emergency growth control measures adopted in other California cities. If approved, Mission Viejo’s building moratorium would go into effect immediately and remain there at least until the city approves a general plan.

Under the action taken Monday night, council staff will review the proposal and is permitted, but not required, to draft a proposed ordinance ordering a freeze. California law permits the imposition of emergency building moratoriums for no longer than four months, but they may be renewed periodically.

“We’re going to take a look at it, and bring something back to them in two weeks,” City Manager Fred Sorsabal said.

Curtis, an outspoken opponent of the Mission Viejo Co., first broached the subject of a development freeze last year. He has argued that some sort of moratorium is needed to keep the company, which built the Mission Viejo planned community and now is wholly owned by New York-based Philip Morris Cos., from overdeveloping the city.

“The most profitable use for Philip Morris may not be the best use for the community,” Curtis said. “We need to try to preserve some hillsides and open space before it’s too late.”

Some of his council colleagues, however, said they believe it is an attempt to distract attention from Curtis’ upcoming recall election, scheduled for Feb. 27. Curtis denies the charge.

The Mission Viejo Co., a major financial backer of the recall, has declined to comment on the matter, saying that it does not want to be drawn into public disagreements with Curtis. But Wendy Wetzel, a spokeswoman for the company, downplayed the importance of the proposal, saying that “95% of our residential units have either been built or have already received approval.”

Curtis contends that at least 1,500 housing units--and possibly as many as 3,000 more--would be affected by the moratorium, which he proposed to leave in effect for about a year.

As Curtis proposed it, the moratorium affects only a few commercial properties. The Trabuco Hills Shopping Center, a major mall being debated, would not be affected.