Dos Vientos Developers Press City for Lost Condos

The city could face a lawsuit unless it rescinds a decision to delete 16 housing units from plans for the massive Dos Vientos development in Newbury Park, according to an attorney for one of the project’s developers.

Chuck Cohen, who represents Courtly Homes Inc., has filed a claim with the city alleging that a City Council decision to delete the units was a breach of contract that violated a prior development agreement. Unless the city allows the units to be transferred to another part of the project, it would face litigation for $1.5 million in damages, Cohen wrote.

But city officials said Monday they violated no agreement when they decided to delete the units during a Sept. 10 hearing.

At that hearing, Courtly Homes asked to build 208 detached condominiums--small homes close to each other--rather than 224 attached duplexes already approved by the city. Developers argued that the modified plan, reducing the total number of units by 16, would mean fewer homes in the project.

“They said this is a better design because it has less units,” City Atty. Mark Sellers said. “We said OK.”

But to make sure that those units weren’t being moved to another part of the 2,350-unit development, the council deleted them, Sellers said. “You can’t bank those units,” Sellers added.

Mayor Judy Lazar, who had voted to approve the condominiums, agreed with Sellers’ assessment.

“I think that [Courtly Homes] said that their argument was that this [modification made the project] less dense,” Lazar said. “It is not less dense, if you move the units elsewhere.”

Lazar said she plans to stick with the decision to have the units deleted “unless I find out that we are legally not able to do that.”

During the Sept. 10 hearing, the council consulted with Sellers, who saw no legal impediment to deleting the units, Lazar said.

Sellers reiterated Monday that the council’s decision to delete the units did not violate the development agreement.

“There is nothing that says the developer can put those units wherever it wants,” he added.

Despite repeated attempts, Cohen could not be reached for comment.

But the council’s decision to allow changes to the development plan has already generated another lawsuit--a complaint from an environmental group alleging that the city had bent its own rules to help the developer.

In October, Save Open Space, a Conejo Valley environmental group, filed a lawsuit challenging the council’s 3-1 approval of the changes on the basis that it violated state law and city rules.

Earlier this year, the council passed an ordinance allowing detached condominiums in “in-fill” areas of the city already surrounded by development. Planning commissioners cited that ordinance when they voted to allow Courtly Homes to build the detached dwellings.

But Save Open Space protested the decision, arguing that the ordinance was intended to be applied to core sections of the city, not new, outlying developments such as Dos Vientos. The group appealed to the council.

The council agreed that the in-fill ordinance did not apply to the tract but approved the changes anyway, saying the homes were allowed under the city’s general housing ordinances.

Attorneys for Save Open Space sued, saying that without using the in-fill ordinance to justify it, the change from duplexes to detached condominiums violated city laws.

Councilwoman Elois Zeanah, who voted against the condominiums, agreed.

“It’s laughable,” Zeanah said. “If deleting 16 units is a violation of the development agreement, so is the approval to change the housing type.

“In my view, if the council wants to return the 16 units that were deleted from the project, that will have to come back to the City Council for a public hearing because it negates the council’s rationale for approving that type housing. This is the most controversial project in the city’s history, and the community should know what it is about and have a say in it.”

The City Council, which is entangled in numerous other legal battles over Dos Vientos, has not yet taken action regarding the claim.