Value of the views versus vegetation The...

Value of the views versus vegetation

The following information is provided to those people who oppose

saving Laguna’s beautiful and unique view sheds.

First, if the problem of excessive over-sized, nonnative

vegetation destroying Laguna’s precious view sheds could be solved

between neighbors over cocktails, there would not have been about

2,000 people eager to sign our informal petition to Save Laguna’s

Views a few years ago. Second, the majority of trees are not

obstructing views, so even if every tree that is obstructing views in

Laguna were pruned or trimmed or removed, there would be no adverse

impact on birds or anything else, though it would help reduce the

number of vermin in town as well as reduce the fire hazard we live

with daily.

Just for fun, you might compare what views contribute to Laguna

against what over-sized, improperly located nonnative trees do. Of

course it’s a biased comparison, but that does not make it any less

accurate.

Laguna’s topography of hills and coastline combine to provide

beautiful and unique views and vistas, which are only available to a

very few places in the world and provide the following assets to all

of us:

1) Views of the ocean, coastline, valleys and distant vistas

create a desirability to visit and live in Laguna to enjoy both

public and private view sheds.

2) Views and open vistas were the natural state of most of Laguna.

They are Laguna’s natural heritage and they cost the city, property

owners, neighbors and visitors nothing.

3) Views provide aesthetic beauty and enjoyment to residents and

visitors.

4) Views require no maintenance or ongoing costs to the city or

citizens.

5) Views greatly increase property values for any site or home,

which offers a view of the white water, coastline, ocean/islands,

hills or valleys, city lights, valley lights and/or distant vistas.

6) Views and view property enhances the value of all Laguna

property, especially neighboring properties even though they may not

have views of their own.

7) Views do not destroy city utilities, sidewalks, streets, or

curbs or clog sewers.

8) Views do not burn.

9) Views do not pollute or clog drainage with leaves, branches

etc.

10) Views do not mess up neighboring property nor invade with

roots and branches.

11) Views do not drop branches or sap on people, cars, utilities

or homes.

12) Views do not generate pollens harmful to those with allergies.

13) Views, which are not obstructed by excessive vegetation, do

not cause neighborhood conflicts.

14) Views increase the property tax base of the city.

15) Views don’t get your home owners/fire insurance increased or

canceled.

Assets of Trees:

1) Trees may provide some privacy. However, with homes in close

proximity, shades work better and low trees or shrubs are more than

adequate. High trees do not provide privacy, as neighbors can see

under them.

2) Trees provide shade. Oversized trees not only provide shade to

the owner, they often block sun to neighbors who do not want that

shade. We are a cool ocean breeze community mostly seeking sun, not

shade.

3) Trees provide oxygen. True, but the ocean is the main source of

oxygen generation and grass and shrubberies provide as much or more

oxygen than a tree.

4) Trees are nice views to some people. True, but they are not

unique views, tree views are available anywhere. You don’t have to

live in Laguna to see trees.

All the assets mentioned of trees are not unique and are available

in any community. If trees are of the most interest or value to a

person, they are available anywhere without destroying the beautiful

views, which are unique to and available only in Laguna.

There is absolutely no reason why anyone, no matter how fond of

trees, should destroy the use, enjoyment and value of the public and

private views nature provided us. The vegetation types and locations

and their care can be controlled to prevent view obstructions and

safety hazards from fire and falling debris.

Shrubs are the only native vegetation to the west-facing slopes of

Laguna Beach. So the first question is: Why destroy beautiful views

unique to Laguna with a tree you can see or grow anywhere? Secondly,

if you must have trees and live in Laguna, why can’t you plant them

where it doesn’t destroy your neighbors’ view sheds or public view

sheds?

DAVE CONNELL

Laguna Beach

Thanks for support about views

On March 5, this newspaper gave me a byline, “How can they take

away our hard-earned view?” It’s been a while, in fact not since my

column called “Silver Linings” ran at another paper.

Today, I am thanking the Coastline Pilot for that coverage of the

loss of our coastline, city lights, white water, and view up the

coast, which our realtor-neighbor has absconded with. Being a

realtor, [my neighbor] most certainly knows what that means as far as

how he has affected the value of our home, both aesthetically and

monetarily.

He has stated that it is more important for him to have this

valuable view as it will be the view from his living room. So our

living room and our master suite are now without.

View equity? Shame on him, and shame on certain members of the

Design Review Board, certain members of the City Council, and our

city manager, who neglected to pick up on his and his architect’s

letter, wherein he stated he would provide a view corridor. A

reasonable person knows that means exactly what it sounds like it

means. It has not been provided. As we all do, we rely on our city

officials to follow up. After all, isn’t that what they are there

for?

Here also, I would like to say a thousand thank yous, from the

bottom of our hearts, to the literally dozens of people who found us,

phoned us and e-mailed us telling us how they cried as well when they

read about our plight.

We are so grateful. It was really touching and heartwarming to

hear from people we don’t even know, realizing how this has impacted

so many caring Lagunans. These are the true Lagunans, and we urge all

of you to keep on fighting for what you know is right.

ARLINE AND DAVE ISAACS

Laguna Beach

Tip for those parking at Nyes Place

Re: “What should the city do to make Nyes Place safer?” Coastline

Pilot March 19: One thing that should be done is eliminate the

parking at the bottom of Nyes Place.

There is a sign that reads “compact cars only” but there are

always SUVs parked. It is almost impossible for two cars to pass each

other with the cars parked on the side.

BETTY MILLER

Laguna Beach

The tide pools need their own officer

I recently moved to Laguna because I love its beaches. Therefore,

I have been reading with interest the recent letters and articles

pertaining to the tide pools. While we have great natural beauty

surrounding us in our mountains and canyons, we have another natural

wonder that is not duplicated anywhere else on Earth. I refer, of

course, to our tide pools.

In the few months I have been here, I have spent a great deal of

time on the beach and at the tide pools. I have seen several abuses

that have shocked me because I know from the signs that they are

gross violations of the tide pools’ rules.

For example, people have pried sea stars from the rocks (injurious

in itself), moving them and other sea critters to smaller, isolated

tide pools, where they risk being cooked by the rapidly warming sea

water. Then there are people, young and old, poking sea anemones at

low tide, causing them to squirt out the sea water they have retained

to keep them alive until the tide returns; or there were the three

busloads of students who descended over the cliffs at Heisler Park to

get to the beach/tide pools below, which couldn’t help but be as

overwhelmed as the kids’ chaperons appeared to be. I could go on.

I am very concerned about the future of our beaches and tide pool

life because I know the abuse they are suffering cannot continue if

they are to survive for my grandchildren and beyond. I recently

joined the Ocean Laguna Tidewater Docents to be proactive and help

protect them.

The docents are volunteering hundreds of hours to the community to

augment the posted tide pool rules through education and their very

presence at the tide pools.

As wonderful as this is, we all know this is just a start. There

are not enough docents to protect the tide pools each hour of each

day. Once they leave the rocks, it is business as usual. Out come the

buckets and in go the hermit crabs, shells, starfish and myriad other

sea life that should be totally protected. While it is expected the

docent numbers will continue to grow, they are intentionally

handicapped. They have no enforcement authority. This is as it should

be.

Such authority currently rests with our lifeguards. They are

wonderfully supportive and work closely with the docents when their

staffing and job priorities permit. Their job, however, is public

safety, not tide pool watchdogs. This is as it should be.

Laguna needs a full-time, specifically trained Marine Safety and

Education Officer. This individual’s job should be, first, to enforce

the marine ecology rules and, second, to oversee ocean programs, such

as school field trips.

By creating such a position, the city of Laguna Beach will show

that it values the importance of the ocean and the tide pools. The

city will give a clear message that it is committed to the

preservation of Laguna Beach’s precious tide pool aquariums. We

cannot continue to ignore this resource, for without it, our very way

of life will be no longer.

LOUISE THORNTON

Laguna Beach

Voice your opinion on Dip House

On April 6, the City Council will hear Councilmember Steve

Dicterow’s appeal of the approval by a diminished Design Review Board

of a proposal to build a house in the dip at 1530 Glenneyre St. The

vote to approve the project was 2 to 1, with the chair recused, the

vice chair in Paris and alternate absent. The result was an approval

by one-third of the six possible votes.

Village Laguna has long opposed the project because of safety

issues, view encroachment and destruction of sensitive habitat. The

house would sit in a water plain that floods during severe rains.

Ben Simon, who voted against the project, said the house fails

design review criteria 4 and 15: “It does not enhance the natural

setting of the location and does not protect neighboring views.”

In addition, he said, it fails Finding One for a Coastal

Development Permit: “The proposed landscape is not in conformance

with the environmentally sensitive habitat.” Simon also cast doubt on

the accuracy of the traffic report submitted by the applicant.

Residents of Laguna are urged to attend the April 6 City Council

meeting and speak out against this unsafe, insensitive project.

LOWER BLUEBIRD

NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN.

Laguna Beach

You have to force the city to act

This letter is in response to Candice Burroughs, March 19 letter

to the editor, “A whitewater view can also be a disturbing view.”

It’s interesting that so many say they moved here because their

impression of Laguna Beach is that it is a city that values the

quality of their environment. Past tense -- with the exception of an

untrustingly persistent commendable few. Do not hold your breath in

anticipation of receiving support from City Hall. This city got to be

so bad that the Environmental Protection Agency had to step in in

order to bring this city into some sort of compliance. What incentive

does the city have to accommodate you? The city received their

windfall of tax revenue from you when you purchased your property.

You are now a burden on infrastructure and cost the city money.

The city recently accepted the Open Space Committee recommendation

not to implement the vision process. They said it would be too

costly. Have we been hermetically sealed in a vacuum and I just

failed to notice?

The vision process suggests resident-comprised volunteer

committees be appointed. Gee, is there a more cost effective way to

go about this process than by having people work free? We will

eventually have to pay, it’s just a matter of pay now or pay a heck

of a lot more for a lot less later. Nevertheless, eventually we will

have to pay. It does serve to illustrate the city and Open Space

Committee’s position.

The vision process, in its ultimate wisdom, listed as a priority,

that an oversight committee be formed to “oversee management so that

the city complies with its own codes.”( Page 44 of the Vision

document). Catherine Cooper, spokesperson on this issue for the

committee, suggested the Open Space Committee become the Oversight

Committee for the other environmental committees. Not quite what the

creators of the vision document intended.

A building permit can live on and on in heavenly perpetuity, while

the city is not honoring the municipal codes for the preservation of

open space, Mar Vista being a perfect example of this. In 1990, the

Certificate of Compliance for this parcel dedicated 10 acres of open space. June 18, 2003, when City Council denied the Mar Vista appeal,

they were in effect also ratifying a new agreement that reduced the

dedicated open space portion to eight acres.

Open space dedications are supposed to be irrevocable and “run

with the land” for 21 years. Now let’s see, 2004-1990 = 14 years. We

have a council with backgrounds in real estate, accounting and an

attorney. What happened, then, to these other two acres and seven

years when it came to this agreement?

Therefore, my advice to you Burroughs, if you do not like seeing

floaters outside your living room window, is to start organizing the

neighbors who share your feelings, and form the “Friends of Aliso

Creek.” Tell council your group has no intention of supporting a

candidate in the fall election that does not have a specific

implementation plan including the funding sources if they are to

expect your vote.

Once the ball is in motion, I imagine you will find your

environmental ethic expands to include more than just your view shed

but to be all living things and something worth being passionate

about.

DEBBIE HERTZ

Laguna Beach

Still fighting in order to stay put

How ironic that Rick Wilson and his Surfrider Foundation are

complaining about public access to El Moro Beach. The fact that

Wilson had his picture taken standing in the middle of the beach and

while walking through the trailer park is evidence enough that the

entire area is open to everyone.

Surfrider and the rest of these groups need to realize that El

Morro Village is a good neighbor, does not prohibit use of the state

park and beach, is willing to facilitate increased public access and

provides important economic benefits that the state parks system and

California cannot and should not disregard.

TODD DAVIS

Newport Coast

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

does not appear, it may be because of space limitations, 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 (949) 494-8979; or send e-mail to coastlinepilot@latimes.com.