• 

  edmondsmeyerson

  May 19, 2025 at 2:51 pm

  Going back to the voters might be the right thing to do. Kind of funny how when you were Mayor there was no concern from you about the thousands of homes you approved for Five Point totally ruining the way the Great Park was suppose to be developed. I remember having a phone conversation with you back then expressing my concern about the Great Park. You told me then to wait and see how great it was going to be. It was horrible for years and now finally things are getting back on track.

• 

  Dee Fox

  May 19, 2025 at 9:55 pm

  Great article! It’s a shame that council members like Melinda Liu really think this is going to help people that work in Irvine be able to live here also. How many times have we heard that? These 3,000 units will be priced in the multi millions and will only seek to benefit the Irvine Company. The affordable housing is a joke! Two-year vouchers and then gone…kicking the problem down the road. I thought Mayor Agran’s plan was to get TIC to use it’s current apartment stock more affordable, not take away a communities recreational activity, that, by the way, is NOT a private course, it is open to all of Irvine! How would residents like the city to come in to their neighborhood and take out their tennis courts or pickleball courts? You can’t believe a word out of TIC…they prove to us their word means nothing when you look at Resolution 88-1. And let’s not forget the new school promised in Los Olivos that they never got! The new council member for District 5 is placing this development right next to IVC’s 17,000 students! Good luck to anyone traveling on Irvine Center Drive! Clearly, she has no clue of this area!

• 

  ParisM

  May 27, 2025 at 10:10 am

  Well written article, Christina. Thanks for pointing out Mike Le Blanc’s letter. Irvine’s population is at least 315,000 by now. More construction means more noise and more people. I agree, let’s vote this down. The IC has become a monopoly. As a retired OC Housing and Community Development Commissioner, we can do better.

• 

  Crit

  June 12, 2025 at 4:45 pm

  Oak Creek, Open Space, and the Future of Irvine: A Respectful Rebuttal

  As an Orangetree resident who enjoys Oak Creek Golf Course—and someone who moved to this neighborhood for its unique blend of amenities and access—I understand why emotions run high over the proposed housing development. I’ve played at Oak Creek. I’ve eaten on its patio. But I’m also raising my voice to say something that may surprise some of my neighbors:

  I’m not here to protect a golf course at the expense of Irvine’s future.

  I’ve read the recent opinion piece in the Irvine Watchdog, and I’ve read the letter from Mr. Michael Le Blanc, a former Irvine Company executive who helped shape the 1988 Open Space Initiative (Resolution 88-1). I respect Mr. Le Blanc’s institutional knowledge and his role in shaping past policy. But respectfully, his argument leans too heavily on selective interpretation and legal-sounding claims that don’t hold up—legally, logically, or morally.

  1. Let’s Start with the Facts: What Did the 1988 Initiative Actually Do?
  Resolution 88-1 was a Memorandum of Understanding—a non-binding agreement between the City and the Irvine Company. It encouraged the set-aside of thousands of acres of open space and allowed landowners to maintain certain commercial uses, including golf courses and agriculture, on specific parcels like Oak Creek.

  What it didn’t do is this:

  It didn’t put the land into a permanent conservation trust.

  It didn’t transfer ownership to the City.

  It didn’t freeze land use forever.

  And critically, it didn’t mandate a public vote before any future changes could be considered.

  Oak Creek has always remained privately owned, zoned for recreational or flexible use, and subject to the normal planning processes the City uses for every other major development.

  So when people say, “This must go to a vote,” that’s simply not supported by the resolution’s language, the law, or long-standing City practice. Unless we’re prepared to send every zoning or land use change to the ballot, we should acknowledge this proposal is being handled exactly as Irvine has always handled land planning: with Council oversight, public hearings, staff review, and negotiated agreements.

  2. Flawed Logic Doesn’t Serve the Public
  Mr. Le Blanc’s letter includes several rhetorical devices that sound persuasive at first glance—but break down under scrutiny:

  Appeal to Authority: Yes, he helped draft the original MOU. That doesn’t make his current interpretation binding or immune from challenge. The needs of 2025 are not the same as those in 1988.

  Equivocation on “Open Space”: Oak Creek is a golf course—privately operated, pay-to-play, with limited public access. Calling that “open space” in the same category as a public park or nature preserve is misleading at best.

  Slippery Slope: Suggesting this one development will unravel Irvine’s preservation strategy is fear-based logic. The City has added protected space, maintained its planning standards, and continues to negotiate responsibly with major landowners.

  Appeal to Tradition: “Back in the 1980s, the intent was…” Cities change. So do their needs. If we held Irvine to every policy of 40 years ago, we’d still be arguing against the Master Plan itself.

  False Dilemma: This isn’t a binary choice between preserving Oak Creek or betraying voters. The real choice is between doing nothing—or responsibly planning for housing, parks, and a school that serves the next generation.

  Emotional Language: Phrases like “backroom deal” and “dangerous precedent” are designed to inflame, not inform. There’s nothing backroom about a publicly agendized, publicly debated MOU with a historic landowner.

  3. Private Property, Public Responsibility
  Let’s be clear about something fundamental: this land belongs to the Irvine Company—a developer with a generational, rooted connection to this city and region. The company has preserved tens of thousands of acres, more than most cities ever dream of. Their long-term stewardship has helped shape Irvine’s identity as one of the most planned and livable cities in the country.

  They are not new players. They are part of Irvine’s DNA.

  Pretending this is some cynical land grab ignores both reality and history. The Oak Creek proposal follows a familiar path: rezoning, public input, and phased development that includes parks, a new school site, and up to 3,100 homes in a central location—near jobs, services, and infrastructure.

  Rejecting this project doesn’t stop growth. It just pushes it elsewhere—where infrastructure is thinner, schools are more crowded, and the environmental costs are higher. Worse, it invites a denser version of the project down the line. History shows that when development is stalled, the eventual outcome is more intense, not less.

  4. We Are Better Than NIMBY Logic
  I was raised to welcome new neighbors—not shut the door behind me. But too often, that’s exactly what’s happening. People who already own homes are trying to block others from joining the city they love. They invoke open space, traffic, and “quality of life”—but under it all is a refusal to accept that change is both inevitable and manageable.

  Traffic can be addressed. Parks can be expanded. Schools can be planned. But none of that happens if we reflexively oppose every change.

  Let’s be honest: opposing this plan doesn’t save Oak Creek. It just delays the future—and likely makes it worse.

  5. Let’s Shape What Comes Next—Not Just Resist It
  This project offers a chance to plan proactively—to build in smart density, to ensure housing options for working families, to locate new infrastructure where it serves everyone. That’s the Irvine way. That’s the legacy we should be protecting.

  Not every piece of land can—or should—remain what it was. Golf courses close. Needs shift. Cities evolve.

  Let’s evolve with them.

• 

  Katherine Daigle

  June 22, 2025 at 2:00 pm

  SaveIrvineOpenSpace.com is a grassroots, community-driven effort dedicated to protecting Irvine’s open spaces, natural beauty, and family-friendly character.
  Irvine was founded on a clear vision: a thoughtful balance between urban living and preserved parks, trails, wildlife corridors, and peaceful neighborhoods. That vision helped create the safe, vibrant, and livable community that so many families — like ours — chose to call home. Many of us came here specifically to escape the fast pace, noise, and congestion of larger cities, seeking a quieter, cleaner environment to raise our children and enjoy a healthier way of life.
  The Oak Creek Golf Course, one of the few remaining open spaces in central Irvine, is under threat of being wiped out to make way for a massive housing development. This public *Preservation Area* in the City’s Open Space Plan is not only a vital environmental asset but also a key part of the community’s heritage.
  Today, that delicate balance is not just at risk but on the brink of being permanently destroyed. The time to act is now.
  In 1988, The Irvine Company (TIC) made a solemn public promise and a commitment to preserve this land as an open space forever. The Oak Creek Golf Course was built in 1996. Despite the 1988 promise made by the Irvine Company to preserve the land as open space, the golf course itself was constructed a few years later, in line with the development of the surrounding area. However, it remained a key part of the community’s open space and recreational offerings. Now, that promise is being reversed with a proposal to build 3,100 homes on this wildlife-preserved property.
  The consequences of this project would be profound:
  • Loss of Wildlife and Natural Beauty — Oak Creek Golf Course is a rare urban sanctuary for local wildlife. Destroying this land would eliminate critical habitat and diminish Irvine’s natural beauty.
  • Broken Promises and Political Involvement— A promise now being pushed aside in favor of profits, with little regard for long-term community impacts. TIC’s proposal to develop this area is a betrayal of the promises made in 1988. It’s a betrayal of our trust in the very entities that should be looking out for the interests of the people they serve. We cannot afford to let this development proceed. The loss of the Oak Creek Golf Course will be felt not only in environmental degradation but also in our safe and secure roadways through our village. Our community, our roads, and our future will be forever altered. We need to stand together to prevent this irreversible and immediate damage.
  • Unaffordable Housing —In a city where the median income is already exorbitantly high, these luxury units will not address affordable housing needs, further deepening economic divides. The housing proposed for this development will not be affordable for the average Irvine family. With the median family income in Irvine surpassing $130,000, these homes will cater to a higher-income demographic, pushing many residents out of the market. TIC’s focus is on profit, not on addressing the housing needs of our community. The result will be greater inequality and less opportunity for middle- and lower-income families in Irvine.
  • Impact on the Community, Woodbridge Village, and Our Roads: This development will have a significant effect on the beauty and livability of our own Woodbridge Village. Our small community roads, designed for residential use, will be forced to function as a metropolitan thoroughfare to accommodate the influx of new residents and the numerous vehicles they bring. The addition of 3,100 homes will result in traffic congestion, overwhelming our peaceful, well-planned community with the noise, pollution, and gridlock of a busy urban corridor. This is a drastic change that no one in Woodbridge bought into or signed up for.
  As development pressures grow, many residents are concerned that recent decisions by city politicians and corporations do not fully reflect Irvine’s original, community-first vision. Growth that is not carefully planned can strain schools, roads, infrastructure, and the environment, diminishing the very qualities that make Irvine exceptional.
  We believe that growth can and should be managed in a way that honors Irvine’s founding principles — protecting open space, prioritizing families, respecting nature, and ensuring a high quality of life for future generations.
  Our mission is to give residents a voice in shaping that future, encouraging thoughtful planning that reflects community values and protects what makes Irvine such a special place to live.
  We wish to preserve Irvine’s open spaces and help ensure a livable, beautiful city for our children and grandchildren.
  Make your voice heard. Together, we can protect our open spaces, our wildlife, and the integrity of our beautiful community. We must hold TIC and City Council accountable to the promises they made and ensure that future generations of Irvine residents can enjoy the same quality of life we’ve cherished.

  Sincerely,
  Katherine Daigle
  [email protected]
  Woodbridge Village Resident

Comments are closed.