Oaks at Peril in Zoning Battle

A home-builder and environmentalists will square off at a meeting today over extensive zoning changes proposed for a scenic canyon area at Orange County’s rugged eastern edge.

The Orange County Planning Commission is scheduled to vote after a public hearing at 1:30 p.m. today in the county Hall of Administration. At issue is whether zoning for 598 acres bordering the Cleveland National Forest should be changed to allow for large-scale grading, removal of hundreds of trees and destruction of other natural resources.

The changes are being sought by Rutter Development Corp. of Irvine, which wants to build 162 homes on two sites along Live Oak Canyon and Santiago Canyon roads. They would allow the developer to remove 493 oak and sycamore trees from the steep foothills and do extensive grading, according to environmental reports -- work that would be necessary to carve housing pads on steep ground.

“They would chop them all down,” said local activist Ray Chandos. “This would mean total slaughter.”

Chandos helped craft initial stringent zoning for the area designed to preserve its rural character and natural resources. He and others are especially worried by a one-word change in the area’s zoning, from “natural” open space to “permanent” open space. Current zoning requires that 70% of any project area be set aside as “natural open space,” meaning it must be preserved as is. That has hamstrung would-be developers in the area, because there is so little level ground to build on; critics charge the word change would open the door to grading.

“This is not an innocuous change,” said Gloria Sefton, a Trabuco Canyon resident for 14 years and co-founder of the Saddleback Canyons Conservancy. “This just completely undermines the very essence of what [the zoning] was enacted to do.”

A Rutter official did not return calls seeking comment on the proposals, which are first steps toward final approval of the Saddle Crest and Saddle Creek housing tracts. In reports prepared for county planners, the company has said it will transplant 43 of the healthiest trees and plant 11,000 seedlings, acorns and smaller trees to make up for the loss. The company also is offering to dedicate 300 acres of its land as permanent open space.

But the California Oak Foundation has complained to the county that transplanting large oaks is not likely to work and that landscaping with trees that would require intensive, long-term care is not a replacement for the areas that would be destroyed.

The plan would be futile, wrote foundation president Janet Cobb. “These trees will have a short life span.”

The dispute echoes a high-profile dispute in Santa Clarita, where an activist has been living in a 400-year-old oak tree dubbed “Old Glory” that is slated to be cut down to make way for a road. The developer in that case, John Laing Homes of Newport Beach, has pledged to move the tree, though critics doubt the step will succeed.

Other objections to the Orange County proposals have been raised by federal and state regulators, wildlife and arborist groups and area residents. A local citizen advisory panel voted against the proposals last month. If the Planning Commission approves them, they will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for a final vote.