Foes of Laguna Canyon Homes Say It With Signatures

Laguna Beach officials and homeowners Wednesday delivered to the Orange County Board of Supervisors what they said were 7,413 flyers signed by people who oppose a proposed commercial and residential project in Laguna Canyon.

The signatures were collected in eight days on street corners, beaches and by mail from people from all over the world, the group said. They were to be added to 2,000 others that had already been sent to the board.

“They’re from people in Orange and Los Angeles counties, the rest of California, 35 states and several foreign countries,” said Richard Harris, a businessman and chairman of the Laguna Canyon Conservancy. “Most of the foreigners were visiting from Europe and Japan.”

Conservancy’s Purpose

The Laguna Canyon Conservancy was formed in January to preserve the natural state of Laguna Canyon, which the conservancy refers to as the last undeveloped, ocean-access, coastal canyon between Malibu and Mexico. In February, the group took out ads in entertainment trade newspapers seeking support from wealthy performers who visit the canyon or own property there.

Accompanying Harris to the supervisors meeting Wednesday were Laguna Beach Mayor Dan Kenney, City Councilwoman Lida Lenney, Orange County businessman John Calabrese and actor Kent McCord of the old “Adam-12” television series, who owns a home in Laguna Beach.

The number of signatures collected, McCord told the supervisors, “shows what Laguna Canyon means to the world, that it is more than just a place to build houses.”

He and the others want the supervisors to reject a proposed development agreement between the county and the Irvine Co. that would allow the company to build 3,200 housing units, a shopping district and a golf course in an unincorporated area just north of Laguna Beach in the northern section of the canyon.

In return for a guarantee protecting the zoning and land-use plan of the project, known as Laguna Laurel, the company would allow 1,250 acres it owns in the area to remain as open or recreational space and would donate an additional 1,350 open acres to the county. Commercial and community-residential development would be restricted to 900 acres.

The company would also pledge to preserve three natural lakes, widen a portion of Laguna Canyon Road and provide space for a new elementary school.

The agreement is scheduled to be before the County Planning Commission on Tuesday and before the Board of Supervisors on April 27.

Adding his voice to the protest against the Laguna Laurel agreement at the supervisors meeting Wednesday was Tom Rogers, a leader of a successful effort to get a slow-growth initiative on the county’s June 7 ballot.

Rogers and other supporters of the initiative have adamantly opposed all nine development agreements approved in recent months by the supervisors on the grounds that they are unconstitutional and an attempt by the board to circumvent the ballot measure.

The slow-growth initiative, if approved by voters, would tie all future development in the county to adequate roads and other services.

Harris said that although members of the Laguna Canyon Conservancy support the slow-growth movement, they are seeking to keep development out of the canyon altogether. The group also is opposed to the widening of Laguna Canyon Road and to Aliso Viejo, an already approved 17,000-unit development to be built on the edge of the canyon.

“We don’t want the canyon to become just another housing project,” Harris said. “It should remain in its natural, pristine state.”

He said his group, with about 135 active members, has considered trying to buy the land from the Irvine Co.

In a letter this week to reporters and editors that outlines the Irvine Co.’s plans in the Laguna Laurel project and the project’s history, Irvine Co. spokesman Larry Thomas suggested that it had been caught up in “the current Great Slow-Growth Debate.”

“If there is one point I would like to stress,” Thomas wrote, “it is this: This project was approved more than two years ago following extensive study, negotiation and public hearings. The actions now pending before the county are related to the implementation of previously approved plans.”

That same point was made Tuesday by Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, whose district covers the affected portion of the canyon.

“We’re not sitting here not interested and concerned about the environment,” Riley said, referring to the Board of Supervisors. “We’ve gone through exhaustive environmental and traffic impact studies and provided for significant public debate.”

Riley said his statements did not mean he would automatically vote to approve the proposed Laguna Laurel agreement.

“I won’t make a forecast of my vote until all the facts are in,” he said, adding that those facts would include data from the Planning Commission’s public hearing Tuesday and the one the Board of Supervisors must hold before its vote.

Harris said supporters of the Laguna Canyon Conservancy planned to pack both meetings.