Laguna Pact for Wildlife Preserve OKd

A $4-million deal to create an 82-acre state wildlife reserve in Laguna Canyon cleared all obstacles Tuesday when the Irvine Co. and other groups involved in the deal agreed to remove land-use restrictions that the state found unacceptable.

The state threatened in October to scuttle its plan to purchase the land from the city of Laguna Beach and create a sanctuary for rare species. State wildlife officials feared that deed restrictions granted too many rights to outside parties, particularly the Irvine Co.

To resolve the state’s concerns, the Irvine Co. agreed to eliminate nearly all of the 20 pages of conditions outlined in the deed, said Carol Hoffman, a company vice president. Included were the most controversial ones--the company’s retention of water rights and its authority to approve and maintain the land’s wildlife habitat.

All sides said Tuesday they were happy with the agreement, which was reached after nearly two months of talks between the developer, the state Wildlife Conservation Board, the city of Laguna Beach, county officials and local environmentalists.

“All’s well that ends well. Everything’s been resolved,” said Jim Sarro, assistant executive director of the Wildlife Conservation Board, which will complete the purchase this week. “The Irvine Co. was very cooperative, really very accommodating, as was the city and the county.”

The Laguna Beach City Council unanimously agreed to the new deal during a closed session Saturday, while environmentalists endorsed it Monday night.

The 82 acres is a small portion of a historic deal made last year to protect Laguna Canyon from development and create a huge regional greenbelt out of the valuable coastal land. The city of Laguna Beach bought 2,150 acres of Laguna Canyon from the Irvine Co. for $78 million, with the intention of selling 82 of those acres to the state for $4 million.

But, in mid-October, a few days before the deal was to close, the state board was notified of a long list of deed restrictions, including many granted to the Irvine Co. State Fish and Game biologists then advised the wildlife board to pull out of the deal, saying the conditions “completely eliminate the desirability of the property as an ecological reserve and for wildlife in general.”

Situated just off Laguna Canyon Road near El Toro Road, the scenic land contains several endangered species of flowering plants, two rare lizards and several rare birds, including California gnatcatchers and cactus wrens.

Initially, Irvine Co. officials didn’t want to renegotiate because the land was already sold to the city, and reopening a portion of the deal might trigger more changes.

But state officials were adamant. They were particularly concerned about the future of the wetlands there if the state didn’t have all water rights.

“This whole thing is a victory for wildlife,” said Larry Sitton, wildlife management supervisor in Southern California for the state Department of Fish and Game. “They (the Irvine Co.) came to the right decision. They left a couple conditions on and they were minor. We didn’t give up anything.”

The company will retain the land’s subsurface mineral rights, below 500 feet, and will be allowed to modify Laguna Canyon Road on a small edge of the state’s land as long as any damage to habitat is corrected.

At the request of Laguna Greenbelt, the deed included a clause that specified what recreational activities and habitat restoration were allowed on the land. The state objected to the provision and it was dropped.

“The decision by all involved was that it wasn’t worth struggling over,” said Elisabeth Brown, president of Laguna Greenbelt, an environmentalist dedicated to preserving the canyon. “It was easier to adjust the restrictions to make the state happy because the city was losing a lot of money in interest on the $4 million. Obviously we’re pleased that the problems were worked out.”

The city had expected to be paid the $4 million in October, and was losing interest every day the deal stalled. City Manager Kenneth C. Frank said the city lost between $20,000 and $30,000 in interest because of the delay.

Irvine Co. officials stressed that the list of conditions was intended to ensure wildlife protection--not thwart it. All of the clauses had been agreed upon by the company, the city, county and local environmentalists, and most were designed to make the parties confident that the canyon land would be properly managed as a preserve.

Hoffman, however, said the company now feels assured that the land is protected because the Irvine Co. retains those mineral and water rights on all the surrounding property sold to the city.

“Given the retention of the restrictions on surrounding property, the state’s landlocked property would be protected. This enabled us to assist the city in making sure this deal went through,” she said.

Sarro said that the state needed to have the conditions removed because “it’s good business and good biology,” he said.

The $4 million in state bond money is from a $776-million fund created by Proposition 70, which California voters approved in 1988 to acquire land for wildlife and public parks.

“We don’t typically invest that kind of money in a project,” Sarro said. “That’s a very large sum for us, and it’s much more than what we typically spend on property. But (Laguna Canyon) is a terrific project. We’re just glad to be a part of it.”

Times correspondent Leslie Earnest contributed to this report.