Plenty reason to deny Driftwood

On Saturday, I attended a tour of the Driftwood Estates

development project, which, if the Laguna Beach City Council approves

it, will probably become known more as a pariah than as a successful

project.

The plan is to develop 15 units on 10-plus relatively inaccessible

acres in exchange for 200-plus acres of very steep, largely

undevelopable land to the city. The tour group was 75 to 100 angry

attendees. The applicant, the developer, the architect and one other

crony were there (whom I don’t count because they have much money to

gain).

The City Council members were there, as well as the chair of the

Laguna Beach Planning Commission, Kimberly Stuart. Needless to say,

if they count themselves among the project supporters, they can count

on opposition to their re-election hopes. For all I know, they could

be supporters. If so, they won’t be re-elected by any in attendance

(except the developer). It continues to annoy me to no end that the

city’s senior planner Ann Larson speaks as if the project were a

foregone conclusion, talking of the project in present (is) or future

(will) tense, instead of conditional (would/may). She must’ve been

sleeping during that English lesson.

Curious to know the extent of my city’s obligation to the

applicant, I asked, “Is the city obliged to allow the applicant to

build 15 homes on this property?” Director of Community Development

Steve May’s answer was “No.” I then asked, “Is the city obliged to

allow the applicant to build more than a single residence on this

property?” “No.” May repeated. A chatty Councilman Steve Dicterow,

next to me at the time, said he disagreed. He essentially said the

city is obligated to approve development plans unless they can

rationally determine the plan is unsound.

Do rational arguments against this project exist? There are so

many, it surprises me that the plan is still being considered. In

fact, at each city Planning Commission hearing I attended, I

protested this waste of our time and money. I emphatically stated

“This is a waste of my time, not to mention a waste of the Planning

Commission’s time and a waste of my tax dollars.”

Here’s some rationale:

* The width of pavement on Driftwood (currently 26 feet, to code

at time of construction, but too narrow in current code); the width

of the proposed extension of Driftwood (28 feet, wide enough for

parking on one side); and the width of roads (28 feet, wide enough

for parking on one side) are barely wide enough for current traffic,

let alone when heavy machinery is moving through!

* Traffic in the area is already overburdened (add to that

Treasure Island Resort, church, school and Driftwood!?); steep (and I

mean steep!) development parcels would require removal and

re-compaction of many lots.

* More water will be needed for the already taxed

wastewater/sewage infrastructure; severe access restrictions (one way

in/out for residents); project requires removal of a waterway on the

city map; loss of habitat of coastal chaparell.

* Grading by the owner of the property; each home will be built

individually, meaning almost endless noise and development, not to

mention Design Review Board and Planning Commission hearings; the

environmental impact report (recommended for certification by the

Planning Commission) doesn’t take into account each home’s effects;

homes below the construction area are in for a lot of mud and debris

crossing their properties.

* The city has already proven they don’t clean out catch basins

as often as necessary, and as a result, people will be flooded and

have damage to their homes.

I urge the City Council to reject the applicant’s request for a

subdivision, as well as removal of the waterway from the city map. It

is not good for Laguna Beach. It is not good for the residents and

neighbors of the Driftwood area. It will not be good for re-election

hopes.

* CLAY LEEDS is a fourth generation Laguna Beach resident.