Dana Point’s Deal for Open Space a Trade-Off to Allow Resort Project

* I applaud the additional open space offered as part of the development of the Dana Point Headlands property, as reported in your story “Dana Point Resort Proposal Scaled Back” (July 15).

To me, the 66 acres of open space in the project are a more than adequate trade-off for the hotel and residences that have been planned. More importantly, it will ensure access to open space most of us have never seen and will not be able to unless this project goes forward.

I cannot believe that some people would try to hold the property owner up for more open space! What is proposed is far in excess of any government requirement, and is certainly more than any other property owner has been prepared to dedicate.

As for traffic impacts, let’s look at the facts: All intersections would operate at very acceptable levels during peak hours, contrary to claims of “major problems” that have been made in the media.

Enough of the political rhetoric! Let’s approve the headlands plan and ensure a legacy of natural preservation and economic prosperity for our community.

STACY SANTMYER COOK

Dana Point

* Each morning, as I walk through the Headlands on my daily walk, I marvel at its beauty and tranquillity. To think that it would be destroyed by developers is incomprehensible. The public would not be the receivers of a benefit; instead, we would reap the destructiveness of pollution, noise, public accessibility and, of course, nature.

Tests have proven that children growing up in California have 15% less lung function than children being raised in other areas of the country. This is directly related to the amount of pollution in our atmosphere today.The emissions from cars, buses and trucks account for approximately 60% of our air pollution. Can you imagine what additional cars would do to a four-lane scenic route like Pacific Coast Highway? Can we afford the additional costs associated with the proposed development of the Headlands? I say an emphatic “No!” The health and environmental costs are unacceptable.

For the future of our children and our atmosphere, I implore residents, and thus custodians of Dana Point, to raise your voices to stop the proposed destruction of our city.

LINDA NEHRING

Dana Point