Coastal Commission can’t decide

Barbara Diamond

Choosing a seat at the California Coastal Commission hearing on the

maintenance yard relocation was like deciding on which side of the

aisle to sit for a Hatfield-McCoy wedding.

“It’s truly a shame that the community has been polarized by the

issue,” said architect Kimberly Stuart, a former member of the city’s

Design Review Board and Planning Commission who spoke against the

relocation.

The commission voted 7 to 2 on July 15 to continue the hearing

until August, because they were unable to reach a conclusion based on

conflicting data delivered by proponents and opponents of the project

and the lack of a parking study.

The vehicle capacity of ACT V and photographs submitted by the

city and the Laguna Canyon Conservancy conflicted, with each side

sure the other was fudging the data.

Complaints were voiced about Councilwoman Toni Iseman using her

position on the commission to influence commissioners against the

project. Commissioners are not required to recuse themselves from

voting on issues in the community where they are elected officials.

“On boards like this, it’s always ‘you vote for mine and I’ll vote

for yours,’” said Martha Lydick, president of the Laguna Beach

Taxpayers Assn., which supports the relocation.

Proponents and opponents were almost evenly matched at the

commission hearing. When asked how many supported the relocation of

the maintenance yard to ACT V, half of the audience stood. When asked

how many opposed it, the other half raised their hands.

“There are 60 speakers, pro and con, pretty evenly divided,”

commission Chairman Mike Reilly said at the beginning of the 2 p.m.

hearing.

Mindful of the intense community interest in the project, Reilly

warned the audience to “be respectful.”

He gave the sides 15 minutes to introduce their positions. The

County of Orange was also offered 15 minutes, but no representative

spoke.

Councilwoman Elizabeth Pearson told the commission she had been

involved with this project for 10 years, starting when she served on

the Planning Commission with Kinsman, whom she followed onto the

council.

“We are talking about a maintenance yard that is pathetic,”

Pearson said. “Six alternate sites have been studied, and none were

found feasible.”

Assistant City Manager John Pietig told commissioners that

replacing the yard with 190 spaces for year-round public parking at

the current yard, 150 spaces at the Laguna College of Art and Design

and 111 spaces at ACT V for summer parking provides more parking than

is lost by relocating the yard. The city had no contract with the

college as of July 15.

Lobbyist Chris Koontz took the opening 15 minutes for the

opposition, representing the Laguna Canyon Conservancy. He challenged

the city’s figures, including the number of vehicles currently and

previously parked at ACT V, which establishes the capacity baseline.

The commission uses the baseline to determine if the city’s plan

parks an equal number of cars.

Koontz cited 318 spaces as the baseline. Frank said that number

had been used. It was wrong, and the city corrected it five years

ago.

“The city submitted an aerial photograph of 170 cars in a filled

lot,” commission staff member Deborah L. Lee said. “However, this

week, the Laguna Canyon Conservancy submitted a photo showing up to

200 to 220 cars.”

Some counts go as high as 430 -- described by Frank as illegal

use.

Koontz said there are alternatives to losing parking at ACT V.

“A lot could be done with the current site,” he said.

A city-sponsored Village Entrance Design Contest stipulated the

inclusion of the maintenance yard, which was approved by City Council

but later discarded by the council majority favoring relocation.

Baglin also said ACT V parking has been a success and is needed

for peripheral parking to snag southbound vehicles before they can

add to the summertime congestion Downtown.

“ACT V is the parking lot of last choice,” said Ken Delino,

chamber president and chair of the city Parking, Circulation and

Transportation Committee.

He said residents from the south end of town or communities to the

south won’t go to ACT V to visit a festival or shop Downtown. No one

has surveyed the drivers who park at ACT V to find out where they

come from.

Municipal Employees Assn. President Mike Powell said the present

yard is unsafe and substandard.

“We have anticipated relocation for 10 years,” he said.

All told, more than 30 public hearings have been held on the

project.

City Manager Ken Frank presented the rebuttal on behalf of the

City Council majority.

“The proposal meets local coastal-plan requirements, fosters the

goals of the Coastal Act and puts 190 parking spaces 2 1/2 blocks

from the city’s biggest beach and right on the doorstep of the

festivals and bordering the business district,” Frank said. “If we

had come to you and said we want to move the corporation yard

Downtown and parking out into the canyon, you would turn us down

flat.”

Frank also guaranteed the city would make 170 parking spaces

available for the public during the summer at ACT V on Saturdays,

Sundays and after 4 p.m. weekdays, an amendment accepted by the

commission staff.