MAILBAG - Nov. 2, 1999

Dunes hotel pictures don’t show everything

You can look at pictures of the Dunes resort to visualize the beauty of

the building and the landscaping, but do the pictures show the back of

the hotel, which is what the residents living in the retirement community

of Bayside Village and especially on Mayflower Street view?

Do pictures show the noise and the smell of the 28-foot service road 15

feet from the Mayflower homes, with its 24-hour use, its three-level

parking structure with blowers to recirculate the emissions-filled air?

Can you listen to the pictures and hear car doors slamming, horns

honking, squealing tires and alarms blaring?

Can you hear the noise of the air conditioners and mechanical equipment

that it takes to service a 400-room full-service resort with 55,000

square feet of meeting facility and an additional 100, two-room time

share suites?

Do the pictures show the street lighting on the service road, the lights

for the parking structure, the lighting required for the arrival of all

guests on the third-floor lobby towering over Bayside Village and 15 feet

from the Mayflower Street residents?

Can you visualize the 9-foot block wall 3 feet from the Mayflower homes

that the draft environmental impact report thinks will mitigate to a

satisfactory level all of the above problems? Can the 75-foot height of a

five-story building be comprehended when you’re 3 feet below the bike

trail as are the Mayflower homes?

Can anyone even imagine the stress this community is going through and

these are our “Golden Years?” Do we pray to God or do we pray to the City

Council not to allow such a use of this environmentally sensitive 30

acres of land, which should be enjoyed in its natural state by all of the

people, or are they only picturing the sound of the money?

JOYCE LAWHORN

Newport Beach

West Side needs realistic solutions

I attended the meeting concerning the West Side Specific Plan, which was

reported in the Oct. 21 article (“West Side lets its voice be heard”).

While I applaud the city’s attempts to get the opinion from normally

ignored residents, I am distressed by the increased divergence from

reality. I believe these meetings are encouraging residents to fantasize

about the future of Costa Mesa without regard to costs and effects.

When asked by the moderator what they would like to see improved, the

audience responded with a number of requests: improved schools, more park

space, a market at 19th and Placentia, more police patrols and increased

access to bus service.

Not surprisingly, these have come up before in other meetings -- they are

things most residents want. Other things mentioned elsewhere, but not

last night, include burying the utility lines, another library and

improving the stock of affordable housing.

No one is asking what these things would cost or how they will be

maintained. For example, everyone is agreed that a decent supermarket is

wanted for the Vista Center at 19th and Placentia, but no one has asked

what happened to the one that used to be there. Why did it close?

If it closed because the declining incomes of the neighboring residents

starved it of sales, wouldn’t a new market be doomed to fail for the same

reason? The existing stores at Triangle Square and the Courtyards have a

better location than the Vista Center. I don’t see how a major

supermarket would be willing to move into such an unpromising territory.

Everyone agrees the schools need improvement. I visited Rea School and

was appalled by its disrepair. The best teachers and administrators in

the state would be discouraged to work in a facility so dilapidated --

sidewalks cracked and heaved and sagging roofs. However, the schools fall

under the jurisdiction of the school board and the city can do little.

Anger should be directed at a school board victimized by multiple

financial problems.

Everyone agrees that the West Side doesn’t have enough park space.

Perhaps this is why no one can agree on the proposed skateboard facility

at Lions Park, the only really accessible space in the area.

Unfortunately, building more parks requires condemning parcels already

developed, a very expensive proposition in money and uprooted residents.

Is anybody volunteering their house to be torn down for a park?

The same obstacles apply to a new library and underground utilities --

who will pay? Where do they go?

An overarching issue that the council has resolutely ignored is the 19th

Street Bridge. No private investors will commit substantial money to the

area so long as the bridge’s fate is unknown. Building the bridge would

change traffic and economic patterns. I believe such a change would be

for the better, but nobody really knows because the city won’t study it.

We must also consider the long-term effects if the city successfully

implements a program of improvements. The area is now affordable for

renters because it is less desirable than Mesa Verde or the East Side.

Making the area nicer will increase property values and rents, driving

out the very people the city wants to save. This effect can be seen in

its extreme form in San Francisco and the Silicon Valley, where the

people who work there can’t afford to live there. I confess I have no

solution to the problem of making nice housing affordable without massive

subsidies, which causes its own problems.

I would not have your readers think we should do nothing about the West

Side. I merely wish the City Council would not raise expectations for

improvements without careful consideration of their costs and benefits.

MICHAEL E. ONTKO

Costa Mesa