LAGUNA NIGUEL : Court Ruling Ends Ridgeline Dispute

A heated controversy that had continued in the city since its incorporation has ended with a court ruling that the City Council is not required to enact or put to a vote an initiative intended to protect the city’s ridgelines.

The judgment, entered last week by Superior Court Judge Jonathan H. Cannon, declared invalid the Ridgeline Protection and Preservation Ordinance Initiative, which was endorsed by more than 4,000 city residents in a petition drive 18 months ago.

City Atty. Terry Dixon said the judge ruled that it would have been unconstitutional to enact an ordinance that could keep people from building on their property without paying them for the loss.

“There were more procedural defects in the thing than I could count,” Dixon said.

An attorney for the committee that proposed the initiative, however, said the judge did not rule on whether the ordinance was constitutional. Robert Helfand said the judge simply endorsed a settlement agreed to by the city and Richard Taylor, chairman of the Laguna Niguel Citizens Committee for Ridgeline Protection and Preservation.

“There was not a decision on the merits,” Helfand said. “If the committee hadn’t agreed to the settlement, the suit would still be ongoing.”

Cannon could not be reached for comment.

The proposed ridgeline protection ordinance, which would have banned development within 300 feet of city ridgelines, has stirred controversy in Laguna Niguel since residents of single undeveloped lots learned the law could keep them from building on their property. About 400 residents showed up for one public hearing on the subject.

City officials contended that the proposed ordinance was unconstitutional because, in effect, it would have taken land from residents without compensation by not allowing them to decide how the land should be used.

Officials said lawsuits that the ordinance might have generated would have put the city at considerable financial risk. Rather than following the standard procedure of either enacting the ordinance or putting it to a vote, the city asked the courts a year ago to decide whether the law was constitutional.

Backers of the ordinance said it was intended only to preserve large, undeveloped chunks of open space. Taylor said Tuesday that he decided to drop the matter because the city is considering ways to buy two parcels of land to preserve as open space.

Taylor said he expects the city to pursue the possibility of buying the parcels, which the Citizens Committee for Ridgeline Protection and Preservation had initially hoped to protect with the ordinance. The parcels are 22 acres above South Laguna known as the Binion property, and 60 acres between Crown Valley Parkway and Pacific Island Drive known as the Hon property.

“That’s what we wanted at the very onset, was to have those properties protected,” Taylor said. “I just said I don’t need to fight anymore if they’re going to pursue purchasing the property.”

At this point, however, the city is simply considering the possibility of land acquisition and exploring various methods other cities have used to buy undeveloped land.