Slow-Growth Forces Sweep to Victory in San Clemente Vote

In a blow to developers, San Clemente voters swept into law Tuesday a citizens’ initiative that could sharply curtail the pace of growth in the city’s backcountry, an area of rolling hills east of the San Diego Freeway.

With all votes counted, Measure B, the slow-growth initiative co-authored by aerospace engineer Thomas Lorch and dentist Brian Rice, had received 4,260 “yes” votes and 2,830 “no” votes. Measure A, an initiative put on the ballot by three City Council members as an alternative to the Rice-Lorch measure, had received 2,931 “yes” votes and 3,998 “no” votes.

“This shows how the people feel about the growth that is coming down,” Rice said. “The pro-development group had the money and the consultants on their side. The reason we won is the concern of the people for the direction the city is going.”

Heavy Turnout for Vote

The 42% turnout was unusually heavy for a San Clemente municipal election, City Clerk Myrna Erway said. The last three regularly scheduled municipal elections averaged only about a 33% turnout, she said.

Approval of Measure B marked a major victory for slow-growth advocates and a defeat for backcountry developers who had contributed heavily to the Measure A campaign.

Measure A received almost $100,000 in support from the four backcountry developers--the Santa Margarita Co., the Lusk Co., Estrella Properties and Western Savings & Loan Assn.

Measure B received about $11,000 in contributions, one-third of which were loans from Lorch, Rice and Joseph Barton, president of the San Clemente Homeowners’ Assn.

The victory for Measure B means that developers will be limited to building 500 units per year on four backcountry projects that total almost 8,000 acres. Last year, developers obtained permits for about 1,700 new units and their current plans call for about 15,000 units to be built by the year 2000. If all the units are built, San Clemente’s population of 31,000 will more than double.

To obtain a share of the 500 permits, developers now will have to submit their plans to a Residential Development Evaluation Board, which will award points to each project and rank them according to their impact on city services and a number of design and public welfare requirements, such as architectural quality and provisions for low-income and senior-citizen housing.

Makeup of Board

The evaluation board will consist of the members of the city’s Planning Commission.

Measure A would have enacted into law a requirement of the city’s general plan that “adequate provision” be made for necessary public services before new homes are built.

It also had a provision for an independent consultant’s study to demonstrate that each project would have a positive fiscal impact on the city over 15 to 20 years before it could be approved.

Rice said Tuesday’s vote “is not going to stop development. We’re still going to get a large number of houses. But we’re going to do it in a way that the city can manage.”

Councilman William C. Mecham, a staunch advocate of Measure A, called the vote “a major mistake for the community. It is going to stifle what would have been a constructive type of growth for the community and will provide very little consistent growth.”

Mecham and other Measure A supporters have said the slow-growth initiative would force developers to abandon their plans to build different types of housing and concentrate instead on high-priced, high-profit homes.

Mecham added that Measure B’s victory could prove costly to San Clemente if developers sue the city over the new law as builders in other cities with similar growth-control ordinances have done.

“We’ll just have to wait and see if it stands up to the test,” he said.

It was the number of “yes” votes in Tuesday’s balloting that determined the victory for Measure B; the “no” votes had little significance.

HOW THEY VOTED

Measure A Would require that provision be made for public services before new homes are built.

For 2,931.

Against 3,998.

Measure B Would limit developers to 500 units per year in four areas that total about 8,000 acres.

For 4,260.

Against 2,830.