75A - PH - EIR -1584 E SANTA CLARA AVE

Home Browse Search

Mayor Miguel A. Pulido and Members of the City Council February 27, 2014 Page 2 alternative will avoid significant impacts. This conclusion is clearly inconsistent with the conclusion elsewhere in the same EIR that preserving 20 -30 trees on larger acreage would have significant adverse impacts on the Orchard. In fact, before the Project proponents agreed to retain any portion of the Orchard, the EIR concluded that preserving double the number of trees would fail to preserve the historic character of the Orchard, based on the identical list of characteristics. To date, the EIR has never considered an alternative that preserves more than 5 to 10 percent of the Orchard (2 to 6 percent of the trees) in an otherwise totally developed urban landscape, The Conservancy has proposed an alternative that provides ample return to the Project proponent, and preserves 50 percent of the Orchard as a biologically and visually intact historic landscape. 3. The 50 -50 Alternative Is Environmentally Superior Under CEQA. The 50 -50 Preservation Alternative proposed by the Conservancy would preserve the Farmhouse and 50 percent of the Orchard, with the remaining 2.5 acres devoted to residential use. This Alternative would avoid or mitigate impacts to the historic Orchard by preserving a large enough portion of the Orchard to be biologically sustainable, and to convey visually the important history of small - scale citrus orchards in the City of Santa Ana. It would avoid impacts to the Farmhouse and would preserve an adequate setting under the Secretary of the interior's Standards. It will also avoid or mitigate the loss of prime agricultural soils on the site, a significant impact which has not been acknowledged or studied in the EIR, The Project meets the requirements for prime agricultural soils under CEQA, with a Storie Rating of 90 and Class I capability, and it is not classified under the State Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program. The loss of prime agricultural soil is a significant impact, which must be mitigated, if feasible — not simply ignored or disregarded because the property is not appropriate for a Williamson Act contract. The 50 -50 Alternative also complies with the current R -1 Zoning of the property, which allows "fruit trees and any agricultural crop." Additional information about the importance of this prime agricultural soil and its soil sequestration value has been provided in a previously submitted letter by soils expert, Guy Stivers, dated May 10, 2013, 4. The 50 -50 Alternative Provides The Owner With Substantial Returns And Is Not A Taking. The 50 -50 Alternative does not require the property owners to operate a citrus orchard. It allows the owners to sell the property to a single developer or multiple purchasers, for its full market value. The only difference between the proposed project and the 50 -50 Alternative is that the owner will sell half of the property for small -lot residential development and the remaining half will be sold as an historic Farmhouse and Orchard. The owners have already received a multi- million dollar offer from the Conservancy for a Preservation Alternative. The fact that the owners might be able to make a larger return from demolishing a "Key" city landmark does not make the 50 -50 Alternative a taking. In fact, under all U.S. and California precedent, a property owner must have no beneficial economic use of the property for a taking to occur. The Project proponent has submitted no economic information at all, much less data supporting a claim for taking. Where a property owner can receive more than two million dollars in compensation for property received as a gift, while also respecting the community's heritage, it is a win -win situation, not a taking. 75A -172