Rancho Mission Viejo Proposal Disappoints

Re “Ranch Unrolls the Blueprints,” Nov. 10:

The public should be aware that the recent filing of a proposal for massive development on the Rancho Mission Viejo flies in the face of promises by the developer in 1993 to formulate a scientifically based Natural Community Conservation Plan.

This program could provide a meaningful and responsive public process. In addition, much of the “open space” proposed by the developer is a sham. A patchwork of sprawl, roads and estate lots would chop up a landscape so beautiful and of such natural value that it is Orange County’s very heart and soul. Instead, let us collaborate on a plan that truly serves the needs of Orange County’s children.

Dan Silver

Coordinator

Endangered Habitats League

Los Angeles

*

The Rancho Mission Viejo plan for 14,000 homes to be built in South County is an environmental disaster in the making. The claim that two-thirds of the land will be set aside for open space is absurd. They seem to be counting the small fire mode areas around the houses as open space. The picture on the front of the California section on Nov. 10 clearly shows that over two-thirds will in fact be built on or isolated, not preserved as open space that can support a functioning ecosystem.

To make matters worse, it will isolate the Rancho Mission Viejo land conservancy and make San Juan Capistrano a pocket surrounded by urban sprawl. It is clear that this kind of urban sprawl could, at best, only meet demands for housing for a very short time.

Urban sprawl will lead to clogged freeways, polluted water and air, and limited access to natural recreation areas. It will not solve the housing problem. To truly meet the demand for housing, we must look to developers who want to build in our current cities. It is time that our elected officials think about the impact of new developments on the environment and infrastructure before approving more urban sprawl.

David Bendall

Aliso Viejo

*

For a long time, I have heard of the legacy of the Rancho Mission Viejo. It has a history that goes back over a hundred years and represents early California. I had heard that the O’Neill family wanted to maintain this legacy. What has happened? Now Rancho Mission Viejo is proposing building 14,000 homes covering most of the remaining 25,000 acres. Where will the ranch be? The company apparently wants the eastern portion to be mini-ranches with most of the 14,000 homes in the western portions of the ranch. In other words, no Rancho Mission Viejo.

I ask that the company do two things. First, opt for a permanent conservation easement in the eastern portion of the ranch that could allow for continued cattle operations, but no building of homes and no property tax (to which the county should agree). Second, withdraw the plans for building 14,000 homes and return to the Natural Community Conservation Plan process in which this most precious and valuable land would be shown to be irreplaceable as open space for the protection of the threatened, endangered and other wild species.

There are, of course, many other reasons why no home building should occur: degradation of water quality, increased traffic, increased air pollution, loss of recreational open space and need for much more expensive infrastructure. From this point, it should be possible to arrange for private, foundation, county, state and federal funding to purchase the remaining land from the company. Let’s protect this last foothill open space.

Paul Carlton

San Clemente

*

Regarding the statement by Tony Moiso of Rancho Mission Viejo that he is disappointed over past land deeded for parkland, particularly Ronald W. Caspers Wilderness Park. It is truly scary that Moiso is so uninformed that he could negatively affect the deeding of land to parks.

Caspers park has never been closed to visitors except for the exclusion of children years ago after lion attacks and a subsequent lawsuit against the county. Children have been welcome for years. Sections of all parks are held from use from time to time to aid recovery from overuse or misuse. Prudent, intelligent park management requires no less. Nothing to do with mountain lions!

Barbara Weagant

Dana Point