Growth on the Ballot

Voters in Newport Beach, San Clemente and Brea are facing four ballot initiatives involving complex land use issues that if approved, would restrict development severely in their cities and, by ripple effect, have an impact on all Orange County.

These measures, however well-intentioned, should be rejected. They fall short on their individual merits because they represent ballot-box planning. That assigns complicated major public works projects to a one-size-fits-all approach. It also seeks to make an end run around sound and proper planning processes and weakens representative local government.

In Newport Beach, Measure S, dubbed the Greenlight Initiative, would require a citywide election on any projects that involve a “major amendment” to the city’s General Plan. A major amendment would be determined by a complicated series of factors and triggers.

The measure would severely restrict growth and take the decision making on major and possibly even smaller projects out of the hands of the city’s planners and elected representatives and give it to voters.

The mere prospect of passage has already impacted the city. The Irvine Co. has withdrawn a proposal that would have added more shopping and office space, apartments and other development to Fashion Island. A proposed hotel and convention center at Newport Dunes also are in limbo.

Also on the Newport Beach ballot is Measure T, a counterproposal put on to nullify Measure S. If both pass, the one with the most votes will become law. Both should be rejected.

Brea initiative proponents have taken a similar approach. Measure N, in addition to requiring the city to set limits on areas such as traffic and water quality, would enable voters to reject any major developments for the next 20 years on more than 5,000 acres of hillside land. About 60% of the land in Carbon Canyon and in the hills north and east of the city is in county territory but in Brea’s sphere of influence.

San Clemente’s Measure U would halt all major home construction until Avenida la Pata is completed as a 5.4-mile, four-lane divided thoroughfare between Avenida Pico and Antonio Parkway. About half of the road is in county territory and city officials say less than a mile of the roadway in the city has an identifiable funding source. Because of the need for the city and county to coordinate planning and funding, and the near certainty of legal challenge if the measure is approved, it seems certain that it will take years to complete the road. Major home construction will be frozen for the duration.

We recommend a No vote on Measures S, T, N and U.

Cities Can Plan Now

It’s not as if the three cities are vulnerable to unchecked, indiscriminate development. In the late 1980s when slow growth also was a ballot issue, San Clemente residents voted to restrict residential building permits to 500 a year. That control still stands.

Newport Beach has its traffic phasing ordinance and Brea has its ban on ridgeline development, open-space protections and a Hillside Management ordinance to cover lands in its sphere of influence if they are annexed into the city.

This is not to say that residents in those cities don’t have valid concerns that deserve consideration by their city representatives. Newport Beach’s general plan and traffic phasing ordinance may well need review and possible updating; scenic hillsides should be protected and new roads may be needed. City councils in those communities should respond to those concerns.

In 1988, a countywide slow-growth measure that linked new development to acceptable levels of traffic and services was defeated soundly.

It also failed to carry in Newport Beach, where voters again are being asked to slow down growth and tie development to traffic and other factors.

At that time, a post-election analysis showed that 45% of the people in the county who voted for the measure did so because of an anti-growth sentiment. Fewer than one in four voters said they did so because they believed it would solve traffic woes. This shows that many voters, including those in Newport Beach, seem to have understood in the past that there are better ways to control traffic than by initiative.

One of the problems in putting complex land use problems on the ballot is that too often the decision is based mainly on raw emotion, not sound planning principles. No one really opposes managing growth. How it’s best managed is the question.

The initiative process is a difficult approach when issues require voters to have a knowledge of complicated technical data in order to make a well-reasoned decision. Complicating the measures proposed in these three cities is the probability that they all face legal challenges if approved.

Growth and Housing

These local initiatives aimed at growth also come at a critical time in the county’s housing crisis. According to state estimates, Orange County needs an additional 75,000 homes for people of all income levels by 2005 just to meet its anticipated population growth. And state law requires each city to have a plan to build its fair share of such housing.

There is a dire shortage of affordable housing that is forcing people to live outside the county and commute back here to work. That only adds to traffic congestion. The county and its cities need to figure out how to meet this demand by providing a range of housing to meet the needs of its labor force. Aggravating a shortage contributes to home prices that already are high. This threatens to affect the county’s labor pool and its economic health.

A No vote on Measures S, T, N and U would be in the best interests of Newport Beach, Brea, San Clemente--and all of Orange County.