Canyon Courts are not elitist In reply...

Canyon Courts are not elitist

In reply to Paul Puma’s comments on my letter to the editor

(“Courts no loss for most players,” Coastline Pilot, April 25)

focused on the Laguna Canyon Courts, I hope to clarify several points

implied in Puma’s piece.

His suggestion that the Canyon Courts are clubby or elitist is

patently false. In fact they may very well be the most open, equal

access venue in Laguna, the City Council’s three minutes access to

public communications notwithstanding.

Reference to the Rules of Play posted on the fence clearly state

“doubles play has priority.” How this is put into effect is elegantly

simple. When a person or two people arrive to play, they queue up and

take the court on their turn. If they pass up their turn, they must

go to the end of the queue. I have seldom seen, nor have Canyon Court

veterans seen, any departure from this system. I do recall one

episode involving a couple who came in four or five years ago and

insisted on their right to take a court for singles play in spite of

being asked to play doubles with the others waiting. Something of a

flap occurred and perhaps that was Puma’s experience.

The point is, regardless of skill level the modus operandi is

first come, first play. It doesn’t always produce the most

competitive tennis available but it is a wonderful example of

democracy in action. In fact, players of extraordinary skill level,

prefer not to play at the Canyon because the competition is not

intense enough for them.

Newcomers showing up to work into the rotation for the first time

are most often greeted with civility if not cordiality. There are, no

doubt, exceptions but in a public environment such as the Canyon

Courts there is no effective means of censoring rude behavior. While

every playground has its bullies, the Canyon Courts are relatively

free of them. If someone acts like a jerk, more times than not they

will be spoken to by one or more of the regulars. Regrettably,

intimidation is always a factor in situations where the preferred

outcome is to win.

I wonder if Puma has ever tried to work into the beach volley play

or the “A” court for a game of 3 on 3 down at Main Beach. The Canyon

Courts are a garden party in comparison. As I was walking on the

boardwalk this past weekend, I witnessed a particularly harsh form of

intimidation on the volleyball court. What drew my attention was a

guy screaming “help, help...” The screamer threw up a set that

Spiderman could not have converted. He then proceeded to mock his

partner for wearing a Speedo. I can only imagine the humiliation the

oddly attired guy must have felt. But would it be right to call for

eliminating the volleyball nets, or the hoops for that matter,

because of the behavior a few jerks? I think not.

City Councilwoman Elizabeth Pearson has asked for a list of people

who regularly play at the courts. Such a list is currently being

compiled. Comments by visitors, neighbors and friends of the Canyon

Courts, who think the courts are an asset to the community, are also

being solicited. The city of Laguna Beach has in the past recognized

the value of the tennis facility. If it must be relocated because of

conflicted needs of the Festival, so be it. We can only hope,

however, that what takes the place of the courts in that location

will serve the community as well as those courts have for 56 years.

TED CALDWELL

Laguna Beach

Design misstatements need harsher discipline

On April 3, I happened to attend a Design Review Board meeting

where one of the items on the agenda was a re-approval of an already

approved and partially built house at 1685 Del Mar Ave. Apparently,

the house, when built, followed the plans submitted to the design

board. However, it was discovered that instead of a 4,800-square-foot

house as stated on the plans, the actual house built was

6,600-square-feet. Someone made a little mistake in calculating the

square footage. Ooops!

Citing another case at 1292 Cliff Drive, the applicant fudged his

numbers in terms of stating he had reduced his footprint 5% instead

of 2.6%, which the actual numbers show. Also, as justification for

the addition, the applicant stated in the original application that

he just wanted the same view as his neighbors. By happenstance, one

of the Design Review Boardmembers opened some blinds in the house to

discover he already had the same view or an even better view as his

neighbors from the existing house.

In each of the above examples, there was very little that the

board could do. In the first example, given that the house was 75%

completed, the board just approved the extra square footage. In the

second instance, board members basically shook their collective heads

over the misstatements and proceeded as if the misrepresentation had

never happened.

These examples seem to portend a potentially dangerous trend. We

know that the Design Review Board and the City Council have a very

challenging job with regard to building in Laguna, and that it is

next to impossible for the city of Laguna’s staff to verify every

single number and every single fact. But unless there are some very

real consequences to fudging, misstating or outright lying, it will

only get worse. Could it just be a coincidence that the above

examples included a homeowner who just happened to be a past Design

Review Board member and the other an active property developer in

Laguna?

Should the city consider such consequences as censure of

architects and builders, homeowners’ applications being summarily

rejected and being prohibited from re-submitting plans for an

extended period of time or charges of fraud? Perhaps this would

encourage property owners, developers and neighbors to be more

accurate and honest during the design review process. After all, we

are talking about preserving and improving neighborhoods and

everything the word “neighborhood” entails.

MIA DAVIDSON

Laguna Beach

Going vertical and fudging footprints

North Laguna is under siege by the aggressive attempts of some

property owners to tear down the small, charming homes that

contribute to Laguna’s history and build homes that go lot-line to

lot-line, building on every possible centimeter.

The rallying cry is, “Go Vertical, Baby!” The strategy includes

adding square footage where it can’t be counted. For example: Add a

planter box at floor level, that is three feet in width, to the

perimeter of the home (that after inspection could have a railing put

on). Or, take an open patio and enclose it with “temporary” fixtures

(to make a whole new living area after inspection). Or, take a

garage, add a sliding glass door, plumbing and heat, and voila ...

another living area (after inspection). There are so many options!

One such case is a home on Cliff Drive, facing the very popular

Crescent Bay Beach. This project is attempting to skirt the required

variance finding and “Go Vertical, Baby!” In the 1960s this home was

given three variances which created a grossly overbuilt home,

especially by today’s standards. No such lot coverage is allowed

today in city regulations or Design Review Board guidelines.

By not increasing the actual footprint of the property an owner

suggests that this is simply a small addition, not adding

square-footage, thereby distorting the current city guidelines.

As a homeowner in North Laguna I am concerned that granting

indiscriminant variances for “going vertical” will set a precedent in

North Laguna for “no more increased footprint” petitions from many

others. Is this what we want?

LAURA WELLSFRY

Laguna Beach

I wanna go where they know my name

McCalla Pharmacy closed and their prescriptions went to Vons

Pharmacy in North Laguna, but we all know that. Geographically that’s

considerable closer to where I live. However, that’s the only plus

that came out of their closing.

At Vons they don’t know my name or who I am, they did at

McCalla’s. My prescriptions are always misplaced, which never

happened at McCalla’s. I deal with someone new at Vons every time I

go in. It was always the same people year after year serving me at

McCalla’s. At Vons if I tell them I’m in a hurry they look at me like

I’m crazy. At McCalla’s Suzy or Eddie would go out of their way to

comply.

The fact of the matter is that family-owned businesses are just

run in a different manner than big chain stores. Laguna Beach has

always had and still has a policy of keeping the chains out and the

“Mom and Pops” in and now I know why, they just care more. When push

comes to shove, caring about your customers really counts.

Thanks Laguna for keeping that policy somewhat intact and watch

out Tony at Bushards, here I come.

JOE GIORDANO

Laguna Beach

Music is crucial to student well-being

Music is crucial to young students in honing creativity, opening

new horizons of the mind and supporting wonderment, appreciation,

imagination and sensitivity. Creativity is the source of possibility

and is a mental muscle that must be trained and exercised often.

Music is crucial in developing a student’s communication because

music is a language that can only be explained with music because of

its various styles, textures, tempos and dynamics. It can elicit an

emotion -- what would a movie be without music?

Music is crucial in developing a student’s critical assessment,

commitment, and learning persistence.

Music is crucial in building a personal, positive self-worth. If a

student’s musical talents are developed, nurtured and sought, then

their value increases and they have self-worth, they can express

themselves in a way only unique to them.

As a choral director and music educator in a religious

institution, the decrease of student music education in grade school

through high school in singing, sight reading and musicianship has

had a very noticeable impact on church choral and general programs.

However, such challenges are great opportunities for church musicians

to provide music schools for communities where public music education

programs have suffered needed support.

BOB GRANT

Music Director

St. Mary’s Church

Laguna Beach

Ropage asks for community support

Ropage Beauty Supply and Salon has been in Laguna Beach for 37

years. It has been a unique, resident serving business from the

beginning.

As with many other businesses on Forest Avenue, our lease came up

for renewal and decisions needed to be made. Although we would have

liked to have stayed on Forest, a move was necessary in order to keep

Ropage open for business for generations to come.

We’ve just recently learned that our current landlord is in

discussions with another beauty supply and salon to occupy our

current space.

Ropage is not opposed to healthy competition but this would most

certainly create beauty supply overkill in Laguna and would

jeopardize the existing five-plus beauty supplies and 50-plus salons.

An appeal has been filed, not only on behalf of Ropage, but on

behalf of the residents of Laguna Beach. The city and residents of

Laguna would surely be happy to welcome a business that will serve

its current unmet needs. Another beauty supply isn’t it.

The appeal will be heard before the City Council on May 6. We hope

to see you there.

THE WEINSTEIN FAMILY

Owners

Ropage Beauty Supply

Laguna Beach

Recipe for an unfriendly encounter

Being disabled makes it very difficult for me to get my groceries

into the house from the car. Usually I receive help, but Friday no

one was home. However, my neighbor was just the other side of the

illegal six-foot fence that he built without a permit and is in

violation of the Milligan Neighborhood Specific Plan designed in

order to have contiguity between yards in this fundamentally rural

area.

Since we’ve contested his fence with the city, I could not ask him

to perform a simple act of friendship.

ANDY WING

Laguna Beach

The Coastline Pilot is eager to run your letters. If your letter

does not appear, it may be because of space restrictions, and the

letter will likely appear next week. If you would like to submit a

letter, write to us at P.O. Box 248, Laguna Beach, CA 92652; fax us

at 494-8979; or send e-mail to coastlinepilot@latimes.com. Please

give your name and include your hometown and phone number, for

verification purposes only.