Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

LETTERS TO THE TIMES

2 Sides of the Rancho Mission Viejo Debate

May 18, 2003

Re "Protect Birds, Open Space," Letters, May 4:

Did Paul Carlton object to the construction of the home he now lives in? I doubt it, and I'll bet he wasn't even concerned about the open space that his and the other homes in his neighborhood displaced. Or that the Boy Scouts would no longer have a place to have their annual Jamboree. If he wants to protect open space, he has a couple of choices: Buy the remaining undeveloped lands of Rancho Mission Viejo, or get together with all his neighbors and go back whence they came. Their homes could be demolished and the land reverted to open space.

If he doesn't like this option, I suggest he take the time to recognize the thousands of acres of open space that have been dedicated to Orange County by major developers.

Development is needed to accommodate growth, growth that occurs because of decisions made in bedrooms and boardrooms. And new infrastructure such as the Foothill corridor's southern extension is needed to accommodate those who will want to live in south Orange County for the same reason he does. It's a great place to live.

Dave Celestin

Laguna Niguel

*

Re "New Plan Endangers the Same Projects," April 25:

It isn't often that we have a chance to do something really great for all the generations that follow. Now is one of those times. If we can save Rancho Mission Viejo from development (actually destruction) then we will allow all the people who will inhabit Orange County in the future an opportunity to see what Orange County was like for hundreds or possibly thousands of years. Once lost, this opportunity will never come again. Our supervisors see only the short term for more business. We must let them know we care to preserve open space.

Philip Glaser DDS

Laguna Niguel

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|