Live-Work Project Opponent Makes His Case



These remarks, lightly edited to submission guideline word length, were made before the Planning Commission on Jan. 8.

The planning commission is tasked with implementing the general plan through actions including the administration of specific plans. We just don’t see how this project in any way matches the goals of our specific plan. This is a violation of our specific plan.

We’ve made it very clear that we want the size and density of this project reduced and have stated specifically that it is too dense and the 30 units should be reduced. No reduction has been proposed after meeting with the developer, and the Planning Commission hasn’t been offered any reduction in the number of units either.
The impacts of doubling the number of residents will be significant to my neighborhood and does not deserve a negative declaration of impacts. In fact, we feel the project should require an EIR.

What impacts? density, congestion, noise, water, air and light pollution, traffic, car crashes, pedestrian accidents, delivery trucks and more.

Ann, when I talked to you about the ordinance you told me the city always leans toward what the neighbors want and don’t worry. Please vote no and honor this statement.

Linda, you claimed due to your involvement within the Arts Foundation you were biased. Please don’t let your bias cloud your decision of what the appropriate size for a development is.

Robert, you’ve voiced concerns about the number of units and density, please remember that when you vote on a 30-unit, multi tenant development in my neighborhood tonight.

Ken, you said 30 units was too many. Please don’t forget that. When you vote tonight.

Norm, thank you for recognizing that this project does not in any way fit the definition or spirit of our specific plan.

The developer has made no concessions on the number of units even though we’ve clearly asked him too. He’s not working with us. Please don’t reward such behavior with anything less than a no vote.

I plead with you to be brave. Be planners. This is not a popularity contest.

Call his bluff. This project can be smaller. He’s playing chicken with us. We’re not blinking. It’s too big. It’s too massive. Vote no!


John Albritton, Laguna Beach

The author is the president of the Laguna Canyon Property Owners Association.


Firebrand Media LLC wants comments that advance the discussion, and we need your help to accomplish this mission. Debate and disagreement are welcomed on our platforms but do it with respect. We won't censor comments we disagree with. Viewpoints from across the political spectrum are welcome here. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, our community is not obliged to host all comments shared on its website or social media pages, including:

  • Hate speech that is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic slurs, or calls for violence against a particular type of person.
  • Obscenity and excessive cursing.
  • Libelous language, whether or not the writer knows what they're saying is false.
We require users to provide their true full name, including first and last names, as a condition for comments. We reserve the right to change this policy based on future developments.

Scroll down to comment on this post.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here