Council approves corporation yard move

Barbara Diamond

Everyone knew from the get-go what the vote would be.

To no one’s surprise, the City Council voted 3 to 2 Tuesday to

spend about $5 million to relocate the city’s corporation yard from

Downtown to the ACT V parcel in Laguna Canyon and approved the

proposed design for the project.

“Council watchers or readers of local papers probably know this is

a 3-2 issue,” said Councilwoman Toni Iseman, shortly after handing

the mayor’s gavel to Cheryl Kinsman. “That is not a mandate. I have

begged -- I have begged, without pride, for a compromise on this

issue, and there are compromises available.”

Slightly more than half of the 16 people who voiced opinions about

the project at the meeting opposed it; the others supported it.

“Tourism is the lifeblood of this town,” Arts Commissioner Jan

Sattler said. “And the arts drive tourism. We need parking close in.

I support the move.”

Many supporters of the relocation of the corporation yard presume

a parking structure will be built in its place.

“There may never be a Village Entrance project,” Councilman Steven

Dicterow said. “But if we do nothing else but move the corporation

yard, it’s an improvement.”

Dicterow is against a parking structure on the Village Entrance

site. He contends that the city’s traffic problems are really

circulation problems that can be cured only by reducing the number of

vehicles clogging the streets.

“Why build a magnet for more cars?” he said. “It doesn’t make

sense.”

Kinsman wants more parking at the Village Entrance, not

necessarily a parking structure. But most of all, she wants the

corporation yard gone.

“It is in ghastly shape,” she said. “We need to fix it, and we

need to fix it now.”

Grilled by Councilman Wayne Baglin, Frank said that five years

ago, he didn’t care whether the corporation yard moved or stayed.

“But I would be frustrated if the council changed it’s mind again,

and I think the employees would be,” Frank said.

A project for the corporation yard was approved by the council in

the late 1990s, a plan was drawn, a coastal development permit issued

and some preliminary work was done on the site. Then the council

rescinded its approval of what Frank called the “gold plated project”

-- it included gravel color-matched to the dirt on the parcel.

There is virtually no opposition to the Village Entrance project,

and not much opposition to moving the corporation yard. Opposition

centers on putting it at ACT V.

“I attended the [county] Planning Commission meeting,” said

Carolyn Wood, Laguna Canyon Conservancy president. “They said 17

people spoke for the development permit, and 17 people spoke against

it. But every single person mentioned the Village Entrance. They

weren’t talking about the corporation yard, they were talking about

the Village Entrance.”

Assistant City Manager John Pietig proposed funding for the

relocation from a hodgepodge of sources: $600,000 that had been

earmarked for public parking in South Laguna; estimated profit of

$2.46 million from the sale of lots in North Laguna that now house

the city’s nursery and assorted vehicles; $900,000 from the Orange

County Transportation Authority; and $300,000 from the city’s Capital

Improvement Fund; and $500,000 from the general fund.

“It’s a wonderful plan,” said Martha Lydick, taxpayer association

president. “It is the best use of our money, and this council has

voted for it in the past.”

Project opponents were primed for the Tuesday meeting at the

Laguna Canyon Conservancy dinner Monday night. Unhampered by a time

limit, Wood laid out the 26 points on which the group based its

appeal of the county ruling, scheduled to be heard by the Board of

Supervisors on Dec. 16. The meeting will be open to the public.

Wood and Iseman questioned the validity of calculations that make

up the loss of more than half of the public parking spaces at ACT V

with splintered parking in other locations. Iseman said the

conditional use permit for the Laguna Beach School of Art and Design,

one of the proposed backup parking sites, would have to be reviewed,

particularly if parking fees are charged.

The free tram service to ACT V, which Wood estimated kept 37,000

vehicles out of Downtown last festival season, would be doomed by the

reduction in parking at that site Iseman said.

Baglin opposed abandoning a proposed parking project in South

Laguna and using the $600,000 for the relocation. He also opposed

taking money out of the general fund for the relocation.

“I hope the council will -- after ignoring my concerns -- consider

these actions,” Baglin said.

“1. Provide a comfortable number of adequate portable restrooms at

ACT V and at the Laguna Beach School of Art and Design (one of the

backup parking sites).

“2. Immediately notify residents within 300 feet of the Olive

Street [city nursery] lots that the lots will be sold and developed.

“3. No surprises on water quality. A plan should be developed and

submitted the regional water quality board for review.

“4. The corporation yard is a total mess. When everything is moved

out, it will still be a total mess. It should be part of the

[relocation] project.

“5. I hope the council goes on record that this project should not

cost any city jobs.”

The council majority in favor of the relocation project approved

all of Baglin’s recommendations.