Mailbag: Banning Ranch would work better as open space

Banning Ranch would work better as open space

In a recent mailbag comment, a reader seemed perplexed as to why there is such opposition to the Banning Ranch project (“Mailbag: Opposition to Banning Ranch project is perplexing,” Dec. 18).

He goes on to say that he knows the outcry about “traffic, pollution, wildlife, loss of open space.” It seems to me he answered his own question. Banning Ranch is one of the last, if not the last, open coastal areas in Orange County. If this space is not saved, a chance to save this rare space will be gone. We who are opposed to it are opposed to it due to “traffic, pollution, wildlife, loss of open space”.

He will not be affected by the 10,000 to 12,000 additional car trips a day coming into his neighborhood. Many of us will be. Not only will the cars increase the pollution in our area but the 10 years of construction will also bring pollution. Not only the Westside of Costa Mesa would be affected, but so will all those who try to get onto the 55 Freeway and connecting roads.

Why must we continue to bunch more and more development into a limited space? We are in a drought and no doubt will be flirting with drought in the future. Adding this many homes will put more strain on our limited water resources. Water may have to one day be brought in at higher prices. Who will pay for that?

Property values are the result of many factors. Building this development does not guarantee an increase in property values. Factors in property value include quality of schools, the economy, interest rates, traffic flow.

The controversy is simply this — quality of life vs. money.

Who will definitely profit from this project? The developer and the city of Newport Beach. Who will be harmed by this project? The people of Costa Mesa, Newport Beach and Huntington Beach.

Here is my suggestion, as simple, and dare I say as reasonable, as it sounds:

1.) Whoever polluted the land in Banning Ranch should be the ones to clean it up. Why should the public, or even the developer, for that matter, clean up a property that they did not pollute? The pollution was caused by extracting oil that, no doubt, made a lot of money for the owner.

2.) Have the owner engage in a conservation easement, which will save them millions of dollars in taxes, and provide the public with the open space it desperately needs.

Ron Frankiewicz

Costa Mesa

*

Irvine mural should stay in place

Re. “Mailbag: Tilly’s mural is the kind of thing we need in Irvine,” (Dec. 25): Maybe if “the planners” spent as much time on the Great Farce (originally planned as a park) as they have deciding what to do with the great mural we might have something to enjoy! I enjoy the mural more then I do the fading orange balloon!

Linda Smith

Irvine