The article you’re about to read is from our reporters doing their important work — investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers’ businesses have been impacted. That’s why The Capistrano Dispatch is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insider’s program here. Thank you.

By Allison Jarrell

A last-minute special City Council meeting called by Mayor Pam Patterson is set to take place Friday, Dec. 11, at 1 p.m. in City Hall, located at 32400 Paseo Adelanto. The meeting regarding the Historic Town Center Master Plan was noticed with an agenda posted online exactly 24 hours in advance.

The mayor’s sole agenda item is the “consideration of a resolution to clarify the Historic Town Center Master Plan regarding the established building height limit and setbacks for new construction on adjoining lots of the Esslinger Building and the Judge Egan House.”

The same item was originally up for consideration at Tuesday’s Planning Commission meeting, but former Planning Director Charlie View informed the commission that several commissioners faced potential conflicts of interest and would need to contact the California Fair Political Practices Commission before participating in the discussion.

The City Council now seems to be bypassing the Planning Commission to discuss the issue itself.

Patterson’s agenda cites the HTC master plan, stating that, “New buildings on directly adjoining lots (of the Esslinger Building and Judge Egan House) must provide a minimum setback equal to the height of the new structure and such new buildings could not exceed the height of the historic structure.”

“These two properties would be substantially preserved in their existing condition and adaptive re-use of these existing structures would be maintained or could occur consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,” the agenda reads.

The land in question, between the Esslinger Building and the Egan House, belongs to local movie producer Steve Oedekerk and is the location for a proposed Kimpton hotel, the application and plans of which are currently being reviewed by the city’s planning department. Patterson’s agenda states that “applicants for large building projects have consistently misconstrued the plain meaning of the language contained in the above-cited paragraph.”

Stay tuned for updates from tomorrow’s meeting.

Trustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

About The Author Capo Dispatch

comments (13)

  • I respect those who take on the task of running a city and support them as much as I can. I am upset and disappointed by our new Mayor’s first action less than a week after being appointed by her peers. Bypassing the Planning Commission and city processes completely. Giving residents 24 hr notice and holding a meeting on a weekday at 1:00 pm so most of us working folks can’t be there. What is so urgent here that required a meeting within 24 hours?

    • One in the afternoon is certainly much better than the three in the morning vote that Sam Allevato did.

      • Clint,
        I think the article pertains to the current Mayor. Neither times are okay for most people. Why not have public meetings when the public can attend?

  • Politics 101 says that when a government official wants to do something greasy, they should schedule a one agenda item meeting on a Friday afternoon. That assures the meeting will be mostly ignored. Mayor Patterson did exactly this when she called a special city council meeting with 24 hours and one minute notification for December 11. The item did not require a special meeting, and certainly did not require to be held on a Friday afternoon in the Holiday shopping season. Her intent was dishonorable.

    • Sam Allevato taking a vote at 3am is quite a bit more inconvenient don’t you think ? Thankfully, the residents saw right through it and obtained enough signatures for a referendum. The residents also saw right through John Taylor and Larry Kramer who also thought it was necessary to have a vote at 3am and the residents booted them right out of office also !!!

      • Clint,
        I think many voters are seeing through the schedule time of this meeting. Both times were wrong.

      • Clint,
        I think some voters thought these types of scheduling issues would be rectified. And now they have learned they have not. Same old same old.

      • So Shelly, is what you are saying that one in the afternoon during normal business hours is a worse time than three in the morning after all the bars have been closed for an hour ? I just want to make sure what you are saying is correct.

      • Clint,
        I am saying that scheduling meetings at times that are difficult for the public to attend is wrong. If the majority of the public cannot attend at 1pm or 3am both times are wrong which is the case here. There are actually some people who can attend at 3am but not at 1pm and some people who can attend at 1pm and not at 3am. Both times are inconvenient for the majority of the public.

        You seem to be against the former council and you measure everything against them. They are no longer in charge. There is a new council and it was their decision to schedule a meeting that was inconvenient to the public. The former council had nothing to do with this. And just because the former council did something wrong it does not make the new council right for doing basically the same thing just because you might like them.

        The 1pm meeting is inconvenient to the majority of the public. This is a reality.

        Are you saying it is okay to schedule meetings at times that are inconvenient for the public because you agree with the new status quo?

      • Clint. Please stop bending the truth. The 3 AM vote was not scheduled. It was a 6:00 PM meeting run long.

      • Dave Solt, it does not have to be scheduled to have a vote at 3am ! At anytime Sam Allevato could have suggested the vote be taken during regular business hours, or continue the meeting to regular business hours. Sam Allevato could do neither of those things. The vote was taken a little after three am and the City Council meeting was adjourned at almost three fifteen am.

        Dave Solt, I would suggest watching the video and see the time stamp on the video. It will help you with the truth.

  • Hi all,
    Please check out the new 4 star Kimpton Hotel Capistrano website. This is the project that this meeting was truly about. And the project Mayor Patterson was trying to kill off during that meeting.

    • Just curious, how does a hotel obtain four stairs when it has not even been built ? If stars are awarded for service, how do you award stars for a quality of service that has not happened yet? Awarding excellence in service and ambience for something that has not been built is stretching it a bit don’t you think ? It would be similar to awarding a movie an Academy Award for Best Picture, but no one has ever seen the movie. Just curious, where can I review the four star rating of this hotel ?

comments (13)

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>