Driftwood Estates project approved

Barbara Diamond

Angry opponents of the approved Driftwood Estates development in

South Laguna denounced the City Council on Tuesday.

Audience members were upset after the council voted 4 to 1 to

adopt a resolution to approve an 11-lot subdivision suitable for

homes as large as 12,000 square feet on a parcel above a neighborhood

of more modest homes.

“It’s unfortunate that this council has failed to represent and

protect people that elected them,” said Penny Elia, president of the

Hobo and Aliso Canyon Neighborhood Assn. and chair of the Save Hobo

Aliso Ridge Task Force of the Sierra Club. “Year after year, we see a

city that works harder for developers, big money speculators and

land-use rights than for the protection of the voting, tax-paying

citizens of this city.

“This city has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear toward many other

impactful projects that have made life a living hell for several

neighborhoods -- Montage Resort and Spa, Diamond Crestview [a court

decision forced the city to accept that development], Eaglerock, Zell

Street, Lower Three Arch Bay, a house in a watercourse in North

Laguna -- just to name a few.”

“I feel I have to make a comment comparing this council with the

one that sat on the dais when the residents of Treasure Island

[mobile home park] were threatened and fought for them,” Driftwood

Drive resident Jeanne Bernstein said.

“Our lives have been diminished,” he said. “We are under siege

with Montage below us and the development above us. We have the sense

that we are devalued, that we are undervalued.”

The Planning Commission approved almost a year ago a 15-lot

project with home sizes limited by the usual city standards for

sub-divisions and the “mansionization” ordinance. The ordinance does

not stipulate minimum or maximum square-footage, using instead

neighborhood compatibility as the measuring stick.

Councilman Wayne Baglin proposed a maximum 6,300-square-foot

footprint for Driftwood. A two-story home could almost double the

square footage.

“I don’t see how a 6,300-square-foot footprint is compatible with

a neighborhood of 3,000 square-foot homes,” Derek Ostensen said.

However, imposing a maximum does not imply a right to -- and

certainly doesn’t guarantee -- that maximum, Planning Commissioner

Norm Grossman said.

“It’s up to the discretion of the Design Review Board,” he said.

Subsequent to the commission’s approval, Councilman Steve Dicterow

volunteered in February to negotiate a project that developer Steve

Vliss and the existing Driftwood neighborhood could support. Roger

von Butow served as Dicterow’s water quality consultant.

Almost seven months of meetings resulted in a reduction of lots

from the 15 approved by the Planning Commission to 11, but that was not enough to gain neighborhood support. Neighborhood representatives

offered a five-lot alternative.

“I am angry at this city council,” said Clay Leeds, who is related

by marriage to a resident of the neighborhood. “Four members of this

council voted in favor of this project in spite of the fact that a

majority of neighbors don’t want it. Inexplicably, the council

decided to give the developer 11 checks [lots] for houses -- when the

city was only obligated to give one.”

To date, more than 20 public and private meetings have been held

on the Driftwood project.

The Planning Commission and city staff presented an inch-thick

report to the council at the Jan. 14 meeting, with recommendations

based on 10 public meetings. The recommendations included approval of

a 15-lot subdivision on 225 acres, with 90% of the acreage dedicated

to open space.

Developer Vliss voluntarily reduced the number of lots to 13,

which increased their size, and submitted a revised proposal at the

council’s Feb. 25 meeting. Nine meetings have been held since then,

resulting in the reduction of lots to 11 and reconfiguration of the

streets from a loop to two cul-de-sacs.

Residents of an uphill neighborhood, who relished the dedication

of adjacent open space included in the proposal, gave their support

to the project.

Project opponent Elia suggested that sometimes gift horses should

have their mouths examined.

The tentative tract map, general plan and local coastal plan

amendments and the associated environmental report were approved at

the council’s Sept. 23 meeting. Tuesday’s resolution included changes

and conditions requested by the council at the previous meeting.