Laguna Laurel Site Is Offered in Installments : Environment: The Irvine Co. said the city could buy the canyon development land over a 10-year period. The city then moved to put a $20-million bond issue on the ballot.

In what local officials consider a milestone in their fight to block development in Laguna Canyon, Irvine Co. officials have made public an offer to sell the property to the city over 10 years.

Irvine Co. spokeswoman Carol Hoffman told city officials that the company is willing to donate $10 million in 2001 to help Laguna Beach purchase and preserve the pristine rolling hills along Laguna Canyon Road.

The proposal to allow the city to buy the land currently earmarked for development of the 2,150-acre, 3,200-home Laguna Laurel Planned Community was outlined by Hoffman at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting.

After her comments, the council unanimously approved placing a $20-million bond issue on the Nov. 6 ballot to pay for a portion of the land.

The latest company proposal, which is based on voter approval of the bond issue, would give the city a decade to purchase the remainder of the property, Irvine Co. spokesman Michael Stockstill said.

Three-quarters of the planned community is already set aside as open space and would be donated by the company to a public agency, such as the county or state, Stockstill said.

Stockstill said that the proposal was unique in that it made purchase of the developable parcels available in affordable increments.

“I definitely think this is a major step forward,” Mayor Lida Lenney said Wednesday.

Local environmentalists agreed that the company’s offer was significant but warned that there are still several major issues to be resolved before any of the company’s offers are accepted.

“There’s a lot to iron out still,” said Michael Phillips, executive director of the Laguna Conservancy and the Laguna Greenbelt, the two local groups that are spearheading the preservation effort. “But, yes, we have come a long way if you consider that last year we weren’t even speaking.”

City officials and local environmentalists have been fighting to preserve the environmentally sensitive coastal canyon since the Board of Supervisors first approved plans to develop the property in 1984.

Last year, after a series of protests and a march through the site of the proposed community, the company began meeting with city officials in an effort to reach a compromise.

“It hasn’t always been easy, but we have made great progress,” Hoffman told the council.

If the bond measure is approved, Hoffman suggested that the company would be willing to sell a portion of the property to the city each year for the next 10 years. At the end of the 10th year, the company would donate $10 million toward the purchase of the final parcel.

“This plan is put forth in the spirit of creating a realistic mechanism that both identifies the fair market value of the land and puts in place a plan to allow for the ultimate purchase of all the Laguna Laurel Planned Community,” Hoffman told council members.

Lenney and other city officials said that despite progress in the talks, they remained frustrated that company representatives have yet to set a firm price, despite a promise Tuesday night by Hoffman to order an appraisal.

City officials said that an appraisal will be meaningless if the company does not agree to sell the property for $50 million, the top price that city officials have said they are willing to pay.

The city is researching a variety of ways to finance purchase of the property, including using funds already given to the city through a state wildlife preservation bond, using county funds, future state monies and private donations.

“I feel pretty confident that we can raise $50 million in a relatively short period of time,” City Manager Kenneth C. Frank said.

Councilman Robert F. Gentry said the major point of disagreement in the ongoing talks lies in whether the property should be appraised as developed land or not.

“We can’t put anything together until we know how much the land is going to sell for,” Gentry said. “One thing we have said loud and clear is that we are not going to be able afford to pay fair market value for developed land.”