City won’t cut Anti-Mall developer any slack

Lolita Harper

COSTA MESA -- The developer who brought the city the successful Lab

Anti-Mall on Bristol Street has failed to convince the City Council to

cutback an unexpected $62,000 in added traffic fees for his new shopping

center.

Expressing some regrets, council members voted 4 to 1 last week to

maintain traffic fees for the Camp development, which is under

construction on Bristol Street. The fees are significantly higher than

charges quoted in earlier discussions with the city.

“This is a very difficult one. In our heart of hearts, we would like

to reduce the fees. But there are larger issues at question that go well

beyond this specific case,” Councilwoman Libby Cowan said.

Mayor Linda Dixon dissented, saying developer Sadeen Sadeghi came to

the city in good faith and trusted negotiations would not change.

The Camp project, at 2937 Bristol St., calls for 35,565 square feet of

specialty retail shops with an outdoor theme, Sadeghi said. During a

series of preliminary negotiations with the transportation department,

traffic fees were estimated at $215,119, based on a citywide rate of $149

per trip.

In August, however, the council approved an increase to $195 per trip

in two areas that border the San Diego Freeway and the Corona del Mar

Freeway. Council members decided by a split vote to charge higher rates

to help fund massive improvement projects on both freeways. The Camp

falls into the affected area, resulting in a $62,000 increase in traffic

fees for the site.

“This is money that we don’t have,” Sadeghi said. “We are not going to

strip or change course, but we have our own report card to keep.”

Sadeghi said there were numerous meetings and conversations with city

staff before the project was pursued.

“We spent months on this before we made a commitmentto this project,”

he said. “There has to be some consistency, otherwise it becomes very

difficult to do business.”

City Atty. Jerry Scheer said there is a difference between preliminary

discussions and official filing procedures. Timelines vary in development

negotiations, Scheer said. Applicants can start talking to city planners

years before any paperwork is filed. By the time Sadeghi filed for an

application, the fee had been increased.

Cowan, who did not support the initial fee increase in August, agreed

with Scheer.

“Until we get an application packet, I don’t see a commitment in a

legal sense,” Cowan said.

Scheer also warned about giving special privilege to Sadeghi, saying

he feared potential lawsuits from other developers who also paid the

higher rate.

Councilman Gary Monahan, who also voted against the earlier increase,

said he was willing to grant the lower price and even the playing field

for all the affected developers. He said he was willing to roll back the

prices and grant refunds to all those who filed with the city since

August, but no support was shown for his suggestion.

Councilwoman Karen Robinson said she came to the meeting ready to

support a reduction in the fees but felt legally compelled to endorse the

higher rate after hearing the discussion.

“I sympathize with the developer, but in this case the council’s hands

are tied,” Robinson said.