Planning Commission's Advice: Rezone Auto Mall

By Martin Henderson

The Planning Commission of Lake Forest on Thursday heard the public comments of 19 speakers generally split on whether a developer should build low-cost residential homes in an area designed for auto dealerships and then rendered a decision. 

They said no.

At least, they said no to Brookfield Homes. But by a 3-2 margin they approved a resolution urging the City Council to change the zoning from commercial to medium-density residential.

The area near Bake and Portola has been targeted by Brookfield Homes for a 151-unit project, although the developer submitted new plans with 147 units that addressed some concerns the commission had about parking, architectural design and a children's play area. 

The commission's vote—with Andrew Hamilton and C.J. Brower overwhelmingly in support of the developers, and Jerry Zechmeister adding the decisive vote in favor of rezoning—is only advisory. The plan is headed to the City Council for a final decision. Though the commission has vetted the Brookfield project and essentially turned it down at this point, the council can still give it the OK.

"I don't see that I could, in good conscience, vote for this when we don't have a viable working project in front of us," said commission Chairman Tim Hughes.

The five other resolutions were turned back 3-2, with only Hamilton and Brower supporting Brookfield Homes' plan for the area.

At least two commissioners, Jerry Verplancke and Zechmeister, said they liked the project despite casting no votes.

Verplancke said it was "a great project but not for this area."

"There's been no demonstrated need for this additional housing considering all the other housing that's been approved in this city over the next five to eight years," he said, referring to the more than 4,100 homes scheduled to be built in Portola Hills and between Bake and Alton.

Zechmeister said there were still "outstanding issues that aren't settled," primarily with parking on the Brookfield proposal.

"I'd like to go on record that we've done these many times in the past and we've been able to work out all the problems and we've had the time to do it," Zechmeister said. "In this case, we've been doing it in a different order than we've done in the past, and it's forcing us to make a decision without working through all the issues."

Zechmeister at one point did some math and came up with the number of parking spaces claimed by the developer that still fell short of the city's current parking standard. 

Hughes made an even stronger case that as the area matures, parking demands will be even greater than those suggested by the developer. Hughes estimated the site might need as many as 526.6 spaces, whereas the developer was providing only 354.4.

"The applicant must be responsible for the conditions they create," Hughes said. "They are creating a parking condition they are going to be looking to the city to address (in the future) by allowing off-site parking or ... adjacent property owners allowing parking on their site."

Dave Bartlett of Brookfield Homes said, "This is about as good as we can make it."

Among the supporters of the project was Pat Bolter of Mercedes Benz of Foothill Ranch, who said an out-of-business dealership across the street wasn't good business for him, that the public is "not sure we're going to stick around."

"I can assure the citizens of Lake Forest that we're going to be here for a long time," Bolter said.

Jim Leach of the South Orange County Economic Coalition also supported the project, which is part of an overall project that will include homes built by Trumark as well, citing the jobs and financial benefits to the city ($5.8 million) and school district it will provide.

Other supporters of the project, including residents, spoke of the blight that exists, and the nighttime boon it would provide for local businesses.

However, there were detractors.

Former councilwoman Marcia Rudolph called on past experience in the city as a cautionary tale. "If there are parking problems in a neighborhood," she said, "you are generating hostilities that don't need to be there."

Paul Matheis of Foothill Ranch called the project a "radical departure from the general plan" and was concerned that "projects like this would get by and change the character and nature of the community."

Jim Gardner expressed concern about the traffic from already-approved homes, and then adding the Brookfield traffic on top of it. His point was that the traffic issue is unknown. 

Former planning commissioner Terry Anderson said he found Brookfield saying it wasn't asking for variances to be disingenuous "because he's asking for a general plan change, a zone change and a change in parking style we've never had in this community. ... He knew what the rules were when he bought the property and now he's asking for something different."

Other residents said they had toured a similar project in Anaheim and questioned the logistics of anything larger than a Prius navigating inside the garage spaces.

Susan Springer said she would like to see the project be a 55-and-older community if it goes forward, an idea Verplancke later said hadn't even been addressed.

One of the most passionate arguments against the project came from appraiser Jeff Evans.

"After those 4,000 homes are built, I wonder if those vacant lots will now be very desirable for retail and commercial property—we don't know yet," Evans said. "It was master planned. I have paid Mello Roos for 20 years to build that infrastructure. I didn't pay Mello Roos to have a development company ramrod a residential development overnight. ... I guarantee you, the Mervyn's building will be leased once those (4,000) houses are built."

Evans suggested he would be happy for Bartlett to build his corporate headquarters on the site, but he asked for prudence to see the impact of the other projects, and "if there's nothing and no one wants to build on those lots, then let him have his project, but not right now."