Trabuco Canyon Neighbors Condemn Development Plan

A controversial plan to build 1,700 new homes and a two-lane road in the backcountry of southern Orange County near Trabuco Canyon was unveiled Friday by county planners who called it a compromise between developers and environmentalists.

Nearby residents, however, were quick to condemn it as a “Trojan horse” that would end up destroying hundreds of historic oak trees and changing forever the character of one of Orange County’s last rural areas.

A proposed two-lane Rose Canyon Road through Trabuco Canyon “will be the single most demoralizing act of development in the entire county,” proclaimed Bruce Conn, a Trabuco Canyon resident and leader of the Rural Canyons Conservation Fund.

“It will have greater impact than development on Coast Highway between Corona del Mar and Laguna Beach.

County officials, however, said their long-awaited growth blueprint preserves the rural character of the 6,500-acre region, while allowing major property owners to develop their land in the chaparral-covered canyons and foothills east of Mission Viejo.

In fact, county planners proudly noted that their plan would leave untouched much of Live Oak Canyon Road, an oak-lined scenic highway that residents fear would be ruined under some development options.

“Rose Canyon Road will allow limited development of Trabuco Canyon without the need to upgrade Live Oak Canyon Road,” said Lynn Dosherry, chief of the county’s land planning unit. “It is a trade-off, one that we believe makes sense.”

The county’s seven-page report included general guidelines, but lacked details about lot sizes, sewers, streets, specific locations for development and kinds of housing that would be allowed. Still, it marked the first time the county has indicated a preferred direction in the widening debate over development in one of the county’s last remaining rural areas.

“It is a preliminary plan that tries to strike a balance,” Dosherry said.

But environmentalists and local activists opposed to all but limited growth in an area designated as a “rural transition zone” expressed dismay at the county’s proposal, particularly the construction of Rose Canyon Road.

The three-mile-long road, which would connect Live Oak Canyon Road with Plano Trabuco Road, is considered by some the most serious threat to the region because it opens up the area to traffic and development and threatens critical wildlife migration corridors and habitat on the edge of Cleveland National Forest.

“The developers are fools,” said Conn, a member of the county’s advisory panel of citizens and landholders reviewing options for growth in an area now dotted by 300 homes, mostly in and around Trabuco Canyon. “This will be the catalyst for the strongest anti-growth sentiment yet in this county. . . . I do fear it is a Trojan horse. I think the county is trying to sell us on the notion we’ve won, when we haven’t.”

But Barry Gross, a former developer and also an advisory group member, disagreed. He said the county’s proposal for new development in the Foothill/Trabuco Specific Plan area is “fair and equitable.”

“A number of people who live in that area have buildable lots and legally they are entitled to build,” said Gross, an official with the county chapter of the Building Industry Assn. “To deny them that right would have been wrong. It’s a fair plan.”

The County Planning Commission is expected to hold hearings on the plan later this month, and the Board of Supervisors is expected to consider the issue in September. County planners will present their recommendations for the Foothill-Trabuco area Wednesday at a meeting with canyon residents at the Trabuco Canyon fire station.

Before issuing their recommendation Friday, county planners spent nearly a year evaluating four options for growth in the area, ranging from 536 homes to 4,833 units. Current planning guidelines would allow about 2,450 homes to be built in the area, best known for thousands of oak trees that shade the canyons and slopes and line the widening rural roads.

Under the county’s new proposal, up to 1,700 new homes could be built: 700 in the Upper Aliso Canyon area, 500 in Trabuco Canyon and 500 in Plano Trabuco. Development densities would vary throughout the area depending on the topography and how much other development already exists, Dosherry said.

For example, in Plano Trabuco, a broad, relatively flat area up to 3 1/2 units per acre would be allowed because it is not far from Rancho Santa Margarita where there is much high-density development. But in the vicinity of Trabuco Canyon, average densities would be much greater with one home for every three acres because of the area’s steep terrain and its proximity to national forest lands.

Densities in Upper Aliso Canyon--an area easily accessible from Santiago Canyon Road and across from the 2,200-home Portola Hills tract--would be about one unit per acre, officials said.

County planners also recommended that two proposed churches on Santiago Canyon Road and two neighborhood shopping centers at Cook’s Corner be included in the final development plan for the area.

But Dosherry said she has concerns about the size and scope of the four projects as currently proposed, though her office has not issued any specific comments or recommendations on any of the proposals. Saddleback Community Church wants to build a 4,800-seat sanctuary, and the Irvine Seventh-day Adventist Church has plans for a new church and a private school. The two shopping centers would have a total of 105,000 square feet, including a grocery store, gas station, retail stores and offices.

Of the county’s recommendations, Rose Canyon Road prompted the harshest reaction.

The road now exists only on the county’s master plan of highways and it is shown as as a four-lane arterial that would serve as a major commuter link between Rancho Santa Margarita and Live Oak Canyon Road. But under the county’s new plan, Rose Canyon Road would only be a two-lane road designed to carry only local traffic and would discourage through-trips by commuters.

Dosherry also said that Rose Canyon Road could be designed and built in such a way as to allow wildlife to safely cross or go under the roadway.

But Ray Chandos, chairman of the advisory group and a local activist, said construction of Rose Canyon Road will “split the community. . . . Rose Canyon Road seems completely inconsistent with the goals of this specific plan to preserve the area.”