Canyon Crest Public Hearing Next Tuesday

Received just today in the mail is a "Notice of Public Hearing" from the City of Brea concerning the long-running saga of Canyon Crest, a 165-unit housing development proposed for 367 acres in the northeastern corner of the city within Carbon Canyon north of Carbon Canyon Road (State Route 142) between Olinda Village and the Orange/San Bernardino counties line.

Last heard from in 2008 when the city's Planning Commission narrowly approved the project on a 3-2 vote, just days before the economic collapse in which we are still mired and a few months before the disastrous Freeway Complex fires that roared through the area, Canyon Crest also was stunted by the loss of the property by developers, The Shopoff Group.  New owners, Old Standard Life Insurance Company, which loaned money to Shopoff, however, announced its intention to pursue the project back in 2009.

Now comes the public hearing next Tuesday, 4 October at 7:00 p.m. before the City Council.  The technical description of the process involved is Appeal of Development Review (CCSP) No. DR 08-01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. TT 15956 and Final Environmental Impact Report No. EIR 02-01.

Also noted in the notice was that:

it is anticipated that the City Council will receive a report from staff, updating them on the status of the appeal application, informing them that the development applicant is now prepared to complete the appeal hearing process, and that the Council will be providing staff its desired direction regarding the entitlement-CEQA processing options.

This desire of the developer to continue the approval process, however, is being appealed by former Mayor and Council member Bev Perry and others from the Planning Commission decision.  This matter was to come before the Council in 2008 before the Shopoff Group lost the property.

The italicized paragraph above, though, makes it appear that little of consequence will happen at next Tuesday's meeting aside from a staff report and then a Council motion for direction to city staff on the "entitlement-CEQA processing options," which seems technicaleze (is that a word?) for how the city could approve the project based on mitigation for unavoidable environmental impacts.

Not that the city has any legal (or moral, if that is relevant) obligation to seek for or approve such mitigation, but  . . .

More on this after the meeting.