IRVINE : Westpark Stalls Over Low-Cost Housing

The Irvine Co.’s plan to build a 3,626-home extension to Westpark Village remained on hold Thursday night after the Planning Commission could not agree on the type of low-cost housing that it will require in the project and where it will be built.

A disagreement over the housing prompted the company to withdraw similar plans for Westpark II in January.

As planned, Westpark II would extend the current Westpark district north past Barranca Parkway and up to Irvine Center Drive, between Culver Drive and Harvard Avenue on what is now agricultural land. It would add about 7,250 residents to the city.

Before the company begins building, however, the Planning Commission must approve the plan and the City Council must hold at least one more public hearing.

The planners can approve the project while attaching requirements, such as mandating that a certain number of the homes be reserved for lower-income families.

Irvine’s General Plan establishes as a goal that 25% of the city’s housing should be affordable to residents earning less than 80% of the average county income. For a family of four, that is about $37,500 a year.

Planning Commission members spent about three hours Thursday discussing how that goal should be applied to Westpark II. Separate plans have been offered by the Irvine Co., by Planning Commissioner Lowell Johnson and by staff members from the city’s Community Development Department.

Included are proposals to build some low-income units in Westpark, to convert other properties outside Westpark to low-income status and to pay fees to the city that would be used to build or pay for other low-income units.

Johnson said he supports low-cost housing but does not like the idea of saddling the Irvine Co. with strict requirements that could cost about $12.2 million, an amount that he said will probably just be added to the cost of the other houses.

“And we’re wondering why the cost of housing is so much in Irvine,” Johnson said.

But Commissioner Effat Mansour retorted that requiring developers to build low-cost housing is the only way that the city will be able to house low-income families. “I don’t think the (Irvine Co.) is unaware of those realities,” he said.

Commissioners delayed a decision on the project until their Sept. 20 meeting because they were uncertain about what the city is allowed to require and how the Irvine Co. would be allowed to implement the requirement.

For instance, Mansour said, he would not want the Irvine Co. to be able to meet the low-income requirements by “converting” lower-priced apartments that are already used by low-income tenants to official designation under the low-income status.

Although Thursday’s discussion was dominated by the issue of low-income housing, other sticky problems have previously emerged in the long debate over the proposed development.

Two public hearings in August tentatively resolved issues such as how close homes should be allowed to the 220,000-volt power lines that run part of the way along the proposed project area and whether helicopter noise from the neighboring Tustin Marine Corps Air Station would create problems for future residents.