Model for Developers: Treasure Island’s OK by Coastal Commission

The California Coastal Commission’s approval of the Treasure Island project in South Laguna Beach was what some are calling a textbook case of how to develop the coast.

Unlike acrimonious divisions on other projects, the developer of Treasure Island, environmental foes and commission staff were able to resolve major differences and move forward. While not everyone was satisfied, most were pleased by the unprecedented protection of the ocean.

“This is the wave of the future. We’re at the crossroads where we can’t continue to do business--or pollution--as usual,” said Susan Jordan of the League for Coastal Protection. “It’s also important because it showed that a constructive relationship can occur between developers and the commission when they’re working toward a common goal of sound, sane development [and] protection of coastal resources.”

Other less cooperative developers ought to follow the Athens Group’s lead, she added.

Commissioners said they supported the $150-million, five-star resort and housing project because of a laundry list of conditions agreed to in advance by Athens Group of Phoenix. Those conditions include stringent water quality requirements, public access to beaches and coves that have been off-limits for decades, and access for the disabled.

“I hope this becomes the standard” for development, said Commissioner Shirley Dettloff, also a Huntington Beach city councilwoman.

CoastKeeper Speaks in Favor of Project

The 275-room hotel, 17 homes and 14 condominiums on 30 acres were approved by the Laguna Beach City Council in February. Orange County CoastKeeper, Village Laguna, the South Laguna Civic Assn. and two individuals appealed the city’s approval to the commission, which trumps local government.

But by Wednesday’s meeting, CoastKeeper was speaking in favor of the project because the developer agreed to major diversion of water runoff and a five-year monitoring program.

“Whenever we can come together at the table and reach compromise and take steps toward cleaner water, we’ll support a project,” said Garry Brown of the Orange County CoastKeeper. “We’re not against development. We’re not against growth. We’re against polluting the marine habitat.”

Michael Beanan, vice president of the South Laguna Civic Assn., said group members are pleased with the concessions they garnered.

“Without our appeal, none of the more stringent water quality [conditions] would have been required . . . they’re the most stringent in California. Nor would the amenities have been extended for the public.” Activists said including picnic tables was crucial to allow lower income and multi-generational families to enjoy the bluff-top park.

Athens plans to begin construction in August and finish in two years. The commission’s approval marks the end of a four-year saga that included hot debates at local meetings, a costly referendum and, finally, a long public hearing in Santa Barbara that drew dozens of passionate Orange County residents before the commission.

There were still opponents in the audience at Wednesday night’s meeting.

Toni Iseman, the only Laguna Beach City Council member to oppose the resort, said the project remains too big, blocks public views and takes up some of Laguna Beach’s last “sacred space.”

Iseman was one of about 40 people signed up to speak Wednesday at the hearing, which didn’t begin until 8 p.m. Dozens of proponents wearing blue and white “I support Treasure Island” buttons, and opponents waving banners had waited since morning to speak.

Tom Ahern, president of Laguna Beach’s Chamber of Commerce, strongly supported the project.

“This . . . will bring high-quality visitors to Laguna Beach. It will stop the downward slide of more T-shirt shops and honky-tonk,” he said.

Ann Christoph, a Village Laguna board member and former Laguna Beach mayor, said some of the conditions, such as a bluff-top setback of 45 feet, were victories. However, she felt the staff and commission didn’t have time to address other issues, such as the massive amount of grading.

“It was just too late an hour, an unfortunate time of day to be getting into more details,” she said. “The citizens who worked on this fought a valiant battle--it’s not easy to be . . . continuously . . . working against the developer and your own city.”

“The things we did achieve were really quite remarkable, considering what we were up against,” Christoph added, citing the consultants, attorney, architects, and landscapers the developer brought to the meeting.