County Erred in Parkland Case, Environmentalists Say : Zoning: Outdated report allegedly used to approve Laguna Niguel development on public property. But administrators deny charge.

LAGUNA NIGUEL —  South County environmentalists last week accused county officials of using an outdated environmental impact report to approve the Marina Hills planned community, now the center of investigation because houses have been built on land once reserved for parkland.

The environmental report had been completed in 1983, when a previous developer outlined plans that left a 96-acre swath preserved for recreation. Before the plans were approved, the developer went a step further and gave the land to the county for use as open space.

When Taylor Woodrow Homes California Ltd. assumed the development rights and sought to revise the plan in 1985, county staffers decided there was no need to conduct a new environmental review, even though the revised tract maps showed that houses would be built on some of the open space.

The County Planning Commission subsequently approved the Taylor Woodrow Homes revision, according to one member, without realizing that open space would be lost.

“Believe me, no one was aware!” Planning Commissioner James Moody said. “In 1985, if in fact the Planning Commission was asked to give up open space, I would have opposed it.”

“The whole thing is bizarre,” said Cindy O’Neal, an environmental activist in Laguna Niguel. “It’s unbelievable. I can’t understand how the county can cite (the 1983 environmental report) as adequate.”

Art Padgett, a director of the Laguna Niguel Environmental Coalition, agreed: “The law says you have to examine the property (for any new impacts), and they changed the property. It’s that simple.”

But county administrators emphatically reject any suggestion that a mistake was made in the approval of the subdivision, which stands on the northern boundary of Salt Creek Corridor Regional Park.

Michael Ruane, director of the county’s Environmental Management Agency, said last week that he was not involved in the decision but defended the work of staff members. Ruane said staffers at the time apparently concluded that the revised plan called for no additional housing units, and thus would not “create new impacts” that might have required a new report.

“That’s the decision that was made at that time,” Ruane said, “whether people like it or not.”

Executives with Taylor Woodrow Homes also say the housing plan was properly reviewed and approved by county officials.

“We had a plan approved,” company President Gordon Tippell said. “I can only tell you that we provided the county with all the documentation they needed to review the plan. If they said we didn’t need any more, then we didn’t need any more.”

The open space in Marina Hills became a subject of investigation recently when county officials accidentally discovered that some of the land was dotted with 100 houses. The revelation outraged Laguna Niguel residents and sent city and county officials scrambling to figure out what happened.

Investigators for the district attorney are also examining the actions of Laguna Niguel City Councilman James F. Krembas, who signed the deed conveying the land title to Taylor Woodrow Homes in 1988, a few months before his wife went to work for the firm. Krembas, who was acting at the time as vice president of the Laguna Niguel Community Services District, has said he signed the deed in the mistaken belief that the transaction involved a different land transfer. He has denied any wrongdoing.

The City Council recently voted to sue Taylor Woodrow Homes for damages and to try to take back the open space that remains.

Last week, the developer released documents showing that the subdivision had cleared the appropriate state and federal environmental hurdles. And in a sharply worded letter to the Laguna Niguel council, lawyers insisted that Marina Hills had received all appropriate local development approvals.

The lawyers urged council members to reconsider their decision to sue, and advised that they could be financially liable for holding up the development.

“Should the council’s action be deemed to be inappropriate by a court, the city would be responsible for all damages,” Taylor Woodrow Homes attorney Allan Songstad warned.

County records show that the Planning Commission staff work on the Taylor Woodrow Homes revision was managed by Bryan Speegle, a former county official who has since joined a private consulting firm.

Last week, Speegle also defended his recommendation that a new environmental impact report for Marina Hills was unnecessary. The revised plans offered by Taylor Woodrow Homes were better than the ones from the previous developer because they left much of the open space untouched. The previous developer, Speegle said, wanted to fill and grade the open space to create a golf course.

“There’s no rare or endangered species on the site. . . . There was the same number of units and the same amount of traffic,” Speegle recalled.

The written report from Speegle recommending that the Planning Commission approve the Taylor Woodrow Homes revision notes that the plan did not increase the number of housing units and provided a better mix of development. The report makes no reference to any houses being built on the open space.

Ruane noted that maps of the old and new development plans would have been included in material presented to the Planning Commission.

But Commissioner Moody says the change should have been pointed out to the commission, which relied heavily on staff. Moody said he had fought hard with the previous developer to eliminate plans for a golf course and expand the open space. He would not have knowingly agreed to relinquish it, he said.

“That ought to have been written out. It’s always written out,” Moody said, adding that the Planning Commission did not have the authority to give up any of the open space. “If it’s a change in land use, it has to be a change approved by the Board of Supervisors.”

Supervisor Roger R. Stanton agreed last week that the changes should have been reviewed by the board.

“I think this is the kind of thing that should be decided at the board level rather than down in the bowels of the organization,” Stanton said. “This is not something that you would treat lightly. This is the kind of thing that should be brought to light. You take the prudent course, and you avoid the kind of nasty situation that has been revealed in the past few weeks.” At a meeting with Marina Hills homeowners last week, Tippell said the current development is far superior to the one envisioned by the previous developer, who had won county approval backed by the 1983 environmental impact report. Under the old plan, residents would have had 96 acres of open space and another six acres for a private park, Tippell noted.

Under the Taylor Woodrow Homes plan, he said, residents enjoy 15 acres of public parks, ball fields and scenic lookouts, 8.5 acres of private swimming pools and recreation centers, and 11.5 grassy acres along Marina Hills Drive. On top of that, Tippell said, 65 acres of open space not taken up by houses will be returned to the public.

Environmentalists and some residents, however, are skeptical.

They charge that some of the land the developer is promising to give back is steep, undevelopable slope.

“When I look at your plan I see everything chopped up,” Marina Hills resident Carole Taylor told Tippell at the homeowners meeting. “I see you count as open space the pool, the recreation center, the greenbelt along the street.”

Tippell also acknowledged that included in his count of recreation areas is a swimming pool and recreation center attached to a condominium across the street from Marina Hills, part of the original subdivision plan but later sold and developed by another firm.

Staff writer George Frank contributed to this story.