Closed School Sites Offer Opportunities : * Both Sides in Conflict May Benefit From Master Plan

At one time, it surely must have appeared that the school-age population in Orange County cities would have a boundless appetite for classroom space.

But as many suburbs around the country have discovered in recent years, the baby boom of the post-World War II era and the relentless advance of new housing tracts gave way to new suburban realities. Today, Huntington Beach, for example, finds itself with 20 closed school sites in five different school districts.

It’s a sign of changing demand that poses a host of problems for school and city planners. And other cities in Orange County face similar problems. Orange Unified School District drew flak over plans to demolish an elementary school for apartments. Irvine is weighing a plan to allow a private school to sell land for houses.

The situation in Huntington Beach is especially instructive. Like many communities on the far end of the growth curve, it has sensibly looked to cut costs and raise much-needed revenue by closing schools no longer in use, and then making them available to developers for housing. Three such sites have already been demolished during the past decade, to be taken up by housing developments and office space.

But today, the anxious search for revenue from closed schools competes with the growing interest in preserving what open space remains in developed communities.

Closed schools, while no longer alive with the sounds of youngsters, can represent some of the best remaining open space available to the neighborhood. Understandably, many are reluctant to see this irretrievable expanse vanish in favor of yet another apartment building or office park. Development plans for both the Wintersburg High School in Huntington Beach Union High School District and Bushard Elementary School in the Fountain Valley School District have met with stiff opposition from residents who feel closed in by traffic, noise and smog.

Wisely, city staff has a meeting scheduled with the City Council on April 6, to which school officials have been invited, to discuss the future of all the closed school sites. The word all is crucial in this approach. It suggests a comprehensive strategy. And the very fact that city officials, charged with overseeing growth, are going to get together with school officials augurs well for a communitywide blueprint approach.

While school officials have evidenced frustration with the city, the long look is warranted. It is not clear what power the city has to restrict development on school property, but it is best to work toward a comprehensive strategy by bringing in all those charged with long-range planning.

It’s possible that there could be real differences in the points of view of city and school officials, if the school districts feel that their backs are against the wall. But it has to be in the interest of the community to try at least for a comprehensive strategy. The master-plan approach might have room for such attractive concepts as leasing land for development, with the idea that the school districts could get property back if needed for future enrollment. Keep in mind, too, that the construction of apartments creates the possibility of future classroom need. New housing brings in new families.

It will probably be easier to save some parcels as open space and designate others for development by looking at the big picture. The city can help take the long view. Done right, the open space versus development conflict may turn out to be as much an opportunity as a headache.