Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE_75BMitre - Ramirez, Norma From: Huizar, Maria Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 4:24 PM To: Trevino, Jay _ —, , Cc: _ Walters, Paul � -- Subject: FW: Do not allow the Santa Clara Property '� Another item for tonight's meeting. _ _ __ _ -- .v.a _ _ From: Magallon, Becky �-� Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 4:20 PM To: Huizar, Maria Subject: FW: Do not allow the Santa Clara Property Maria, I'm forwarding. Becky From: ilpkaneCa�oacbell.net fmailto:jlpkaneCa7oacbell.netl Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 10:52 AM To: Pulido, Miguel Subject: Do not allow the Santa Clara Property understand that the East Santa Clara orange grove is on the Council meeting agenda this evening. As a native of Santa Ana and a residing four blocks from the orange grove, I urge you to defend property rights and deny the appeal from the Save Our Orchard Coalition. My family owned orange groves in Santa Ana many years ago and I see this grove has a few viable trees but it is not worth saving. I also do not think the City should spend the money to buy the property when we are in such dire straits at this time. Please deny this appeal. Patricia and James Kane Santa Ana Ca �' ;G�. i RESOURCES AGENCY OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 1725 23" Street Suite 100 SACRAMENTO, CA 94295 -0001 (916) 445 -7000 Fax (916) 445 -7053 oalshpo� parks. oa. gov April 30, 2012 Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council City of Santa Ana P.O. Box 1988, M -31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 RE: Sexlinger Orchard and Farmhouse National Register Eligibility Honorable Mayor Pulido and Council Members: Edmund G. Brown, JR., Governor The Office of Historic Preservation has recently received draft National Register of Historic Places forms and photographs for the Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Farmhouse in Santa Ana. Based on our preliminary review of the documentation we find the Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Farmhouse eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as well as the California Register of Historical Resources. The Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Farmhouse is a rare, intact example of a historic citrus farm in a region of the state where the rapid pace of growth continually threatens the last vestiges of its rich agricultural history. This five -acre orchard, purchased in 1913 and occupied continuously by the Sexlinger family for 92 years, represents a period in history when small -scale citrus growers and modest family farms were one of the most important businesses driving southern California's economy and culture. The Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Farmhouse retains a high degree of historical integrity for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A (Association with important events) and Criterion C (Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction). I support and encourage all efforts to preserve this tangible link to Santa Ana's rise as a commercial and civic center that served the regional citrus industry. If you have further questionsI please contact Jay Correia, Supervisor of the National Register Unit, at (916) 445 -7008 or icorrt�parks.ca.gov. Sin eel , Milford Wayne onaldson, FAIA State Historic P servation Officer �..� /-J C_j -' L' / Add itiona I Letters of Opposition May 4, 20� 2 Santa Ana City Council City Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92703 Dear Council Members; On Monday, May 7, 20y 2, you will vote on an agenda item regarding an appeal to a recent decision of the Historic Resources Commission (SAHRC). The Commission voted to deny the application to the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties for the Sexlinger Orchard and Farmhouse at '1584 E. Santa Clara Avenue. Part of the reason for the denial was due to the uniqueness of designating a living, natural resource as historic, and part of it was due to the practical consideration that the current owners have no interest in keeping the orchard intact. In fact, the owners have completed an EIR to dismantle the resource, and pursue residential development. The appeal is based on the SAHRC staff report that recommended the property's inclusion on the register, the endorsement by the Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society, public support expressed over the last six years, as well as supporting documentation within the Cultural Resource Studies that recommends the historic designation. You don't need another letter of support for placing the Sexlinger Orchard on the historic register. The number of historic experts, community leaders, and citizens who favor historical preservation of the Sexlinger Orchard far outweigh the handful of people who favor building single family homes on the five -acre site. The City of Santa Ana is in possession of hundreds of letters, public statements and professional reports, which clearly demonstrate the political support and factual justification that the City leaders need to formally recognize this historic resource. Perhaps you just need to achieve clarity on exactly who is opposing the designation of the property as an historic resource. Outside the non - profit organization who was bequeathed the Sexlinger fortune, and a local family who, as rumors have it, held a grudge against the Sexlinger spinster sisters, is there anyone else who doesn't have a vested interest in destroying the history of the Sexlingers? No. Has any reputable historic expert, not on the payroll of the beneficiary, claimed that the Orchard has no historic value? No. Further, has the non - profit beneficiary of the estate ever shown any interest in celebrating the Sexlingers? For the many millions of dollars that it has received from the Sexlingers, is there a facility named in their honor, a named scholarship fund, or even a historic museum photo exhibit of what the Sexlingers accomplished? All that money, and no recognition? A huge donation, and no equitable legacy for a family that '� unfortunately bore no descendants? Oh wait, there is one - -the Sexlinger name is on an interior wall at the office of Concordia University's president. Not the whole wall, mind you. It shares the wall, along with the names of other major donors. I want to think that this is simply an oversight for a busy religious institution, but that institution has been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to deny that there is any historic value to the Sexlinger's homestead. Now that, is an odd token of gratitude. Historically speaking, I want to know more about Martha and Esther Sexlinger, as well as their parents, Georg and Sophia. I want to know why, for almost one hundred years, they gave of themselves to that five -acre orchard. I want to know how Georg's work at Con Edison and his investment prowess contributed to their classic, American rags to riches story. I want to know why Martha and Esther, long after they became millionaires, continued to live in a humble clapboard cottage, donating oranges to the needy, and watering their trees by hand. I want to know how their parents, who suffered the loss of a son while they were young, taught their two girls to defend the family homestead against all outsiders, including the City of Santa Ana's mid - century attempt to impose eminent domain and develop the property_ I want to see the vintage photos of this brave and hard- working family, and learn how their history is intertwined with Santa Ana's. I want to be reminded that Orange County grew and prospered because of the integrity and faith of people like the Sexlingers. I want to know how Martha and Esther, working outdoors well into their nineties, kept their trees so healthy that abundant crops of oranges continue to fall from their branches, despite no irrigation for seven years! The institutional benefactor of the Sexlinger estate hasn't cared about these "trivial" matters_ Though it had every opportunity, it didn't preserve the history of the Sexlingers, and it doesn't have the photos, diaries, agricultural records, or other archival treasures that would celebrate their lives_ As the sole benefactor, it had total control over the historical account of the Sexlingers, and it didn't even take the time to pass along the family photos to a museum or genealogy database. Contrast this lack of respect with how family photos, washed ashore from the tsunami in Fukushima, Japan, are being lovingly preserved. Now you can contrast the character of the corporation that is objecting to the historic designation of the property, with the hundreds of people who support it. I walk and drive past that orchard everyday, and I've grown to care about people I've never met_ I will cry the day the farmhouse and orchard are gone because the site is a monument to what an ordinary family can do when its members work hard and persevere. On the day 1 hear the sound of earth movers breaking through the walls of the Sexlinger home, taking away the history of my neighborhood, I will grieve_ don't know what Martha Sexlinger's final wishes were. Her trust does not appear to be part of the public record in Orange County. I have heard from her neighbors that she loved the orchard. In contrast, I have heard from the aforementioned, rather biased parties that her dying wish was to see the orchard plowed under. However, if that is 2 done, there will be nothing left of the Sexlingers. As someone who grew up on a farm and loved the land, I find it hard to believe that Martha or Esther wanted that. Why do I take the time to write the City of Santa Ana Council a letter and request that you recognize this historic resource, and validate the investment that the Sexlingers made in our City? I wish I could say it's because I believe my elected officials hold the public trust in high regard, and won't honor the wishes of the 1 %over the 99 %. No, it's because I've lived long enough to see that everyone is capable of a comeback. I set aside my pessimism and join with many others in the Portola Park neighborhood and ask that you designate this property on the basis of its historic merit and relevance. am asking that you become inspired by Martha and Esther Sexlinger's determination, and preserve a classic American story, which belongs to all immigrants_ Martha didn't give up doing what she believed was right at 98 years of age, and neither should we. Honest labor is better than riches, Deborah Strunk 3 - -- ��.- �- -r`�f= f Fr?fr:cri May 7, 2012 Honorable Mayor Pulido and the Santa Ana City Council City of Santa Ana 20 Chic Center Plaza Santa Ana CA 92701 Dear Mayor Pulido and Members of the Santa Ana City Council; The Historic French Park Association asks that you reconsider the decision of the Historic Resources Commission (HRC) and add the historic Sexlinger house, and its accompanying orchard, to the City's Register of Historic Properties. Without your help the Sexl[nger house and orchard may be razed. The house and orange orchard are the last intact example of an original farmstead and citrus orchard in the City of Santa Ana. n Is Important that the City recognize this unique cultural resource. K is our opinion that the HRC, at its April 2012 meeting, did not thoroughly consider the facts presented in the Staff's report which recommended adding the house and orchard�to the City's Register. Staff's report states that the house and orchard qualify for addition to the City's Register under Criterion #6, because K represents a business that was once common. BY adding the house and orchard to the City's Register the community can work with the landowner to purchase the property to preserve the house and orchard for future generations to visit and enjoy. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter. Should have any questions, 1 can be reached at (714) 639 -6219. Respectfully yours, Debbie McEwen, President Historic French Park Association cc: Heritage Orange County Orange County Historical Commission Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society Save Our Orchard Coalition Susan Brandt- Hawley Historic Fronch Park Assodatlon, PA, dox 1452, Santa Arr, G !2702 May S, 2012 Mayor Miguel Pulido Members of the Santa Ana City CounGl City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 SUBJECT: Historic Resources Commission ApplicatJon No. 2012 -01 Dear Mayor Pulido and Members of the Council: This letter ooncems the recent action by the Santa Ana Historic Resources Commission not to include the Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Family Farmhouse on tfie Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties. The decision by the Commission came as something as a surprise to the many who support the preservation of this historic site, as the property meets the necessary criteria for inclusion on the city's register. When citrus was synonymous with Orange County, hundreds of properties like the Sexlinger orchard dotted the landscape. These were small family operations with a house on -site. Now there Is just one in Santa Ana and a small handful in the rest of Orange County. This property is indeed worthy of recognition. Much to the credit of the clt�s leadership, many outstanding buildings and properties that help define Santa Ana have been preserved and made useful. As a result, Santa Ana is a more attractive and inviting community, both to residents and to visitors_ Please reverse the decision of the Historical Resources Commission and add the Sexlinger Orange Orchard and Family Farmhouse to the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties. Most sincerely, Marshall Duell Mitre - Ramirez, Norma From: Huizar, Maria Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 1 Jay, attached is another letter received on tonight's item. From: mollysar @aol.com [mailto:mollysar @aol.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 11:05 AM To: Huizar, Maria Subject: Sexlinger House and Orchard Maria dear - Please circulate this letter to Mayor, asd City Council Persons and Acting City Manager before tonites meeting. Thank you Molly Doughty Please vote to return the above - referenced to the City's Historic Register. in the event it has never been on the City's Historic register, it should be. Farnibg history is what Santa ana and Orange County is what its all about; our roots, our heritage, our development. young people going to high school and coming home home to help work the crops. was raised on a 10 acre farm at the corner of Euclid and Edinger. Thank you. Molly Doughty :02 PM To: Trevino, Jay Cc: Walters, Paul Subject: FW: Sexlinger House and Orchard Jay, attached is another letter received on tonight's item. From: mollysar @aol.com [mailto:mollysar @aol.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 11:05 AM To: Huizar, Maria Subject: Sexlinger House and Orchard Maria dear - Please circulate this letter to Mayor, asd City Council Persons and Acting City Manager before tonites meeting. Thank you Molly Doughty Please vote to return the above - referenced to the City's Historic Register. in the event it has never been on the City's Historic register, it should be. Farnibg history is what Santa ana and Orange County is what its all about; our roots, our heritage, our development. young people going to high school and coming home home to help work the crops. was raised on a 10 acre farm at the corner of Euclid and Edinger. Thank you. Molly Doughty a �. � , Add itiona I Letters of Support �� CONCORUTA utJlVe =. IaSI'r "v May 4, 2012 -- `; Mr. Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA State Historic Preservation OfFcer Office of Historic Preservation - Da:partment of Parks and Recreation 1725 23rd Street, Suite ] 00 Sacramento, CA 94296 -0001 Re: Sexlinger Orchard and Fannliouse National Register Eligibility Dear Mr. Donaldson: "1'hc undersigned are representatives of Lutheran High School of Orange County and Concordia University lrvinc, the current owners of the Sexlinger Orchard and Farnihotrse referenced above. Both institutions were formed years ago as religious, non - profit, corporations. Although we arc separate, we are both Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod educational institutions with the shared mission of spreading the gospel message of salvation by grace, through faith in Jesus Christ. We write this letter because we oppose the listing of the Sexlinger Orchard and Farmhouse in either the Register of historic Ylaccs or in the California Register of Historical Resources. Frankly, we are disappointed with your agency's complete failure to involve us in your proceedings. We have only just learned of your letter dated April 30, 2012 to Mayor Pulido and. the Santa Ana City Council members. As we have shared with the City of Santa Ana stall and the City's Historic Resources Commission, there are several reasons why we - as the current owners - oppose the listing. We have attached a copy of our March 21, 2012 letter to the City For your review. Obviously, we did not request that your agency consider listing the Sexlinger Orchard or Farmhouse. As we understand tlic applicable legal process (36 CFR 60), however, you tyre required to notify us directly, and in writing if you intend to nominate our property to the National Register. We are not required to ferret out your actions. After receiving proper notice, we are to receive the opportunity to object -which we will da <by submitting the required notarized statement certifying that we are the owners and object to the listing). By law, after we object, the properly will not be listed (36 CFR 60.6(g)). Devebping Wise, Honorable and Cultivated Citizens - �5sa Concordia west � v 9854 -8002 i =.. I . cal.eda v.e.: Mvloo, Cali(ornla coy 229 -1200 rr. 92612 -3203 Wo nre sorry that ywtr of[lce lugs been chnwn Into this nurtler by oppwtents to the developtl�wN project Thal wo I�avc sttbniiltcd to the City of Blurts Ann for our ptopeMy. 1- lowevcr, we nsk that you Fomtally justify and incliulo us in the process alwuld your agc�u:y insist on goh�g forward with twsy tornutil notsshmtiota. Siaiccrcly, Gregg Pinick Kovin Tildco 13xccutivc Director LtNhcrnn High School of Ornngc Counly co: Mayor Miguel Pulirlo and City Co�uicil Ms. Karen Hahrzn, Planning Mmmgcr Executive Vice President of Finatsco and Chicf Financial OlYiccr Concorclin University Irvine ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ''`` County of V ��q On �V �"4" _ 7'� 1 i- before me. �J.(-- �'C_Y�A%•t �-, i�:a(- z�.R -. P�lhl t G nn (insert na and H of the o er) personally appeared %ftAA � Yt � i Gl�i . who proved to me on the basis of fiallsfectory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) islare subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capecity(los). and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the Instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted. executed the Instrument. 1 certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the Stales of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. 8.l.iYLL WITNESS my hand and official seal. � NOTARY ����nww1 Signature Jl— L (Seat) CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of Califomia County of �h Q/t -mil- G On MAY 4r %y f2 before me, PtyN�1"oi6 MUGK' K(Tf/4 -KY pbt(zLIG ate Here Insatl Name and TW at the Officer personally appeared kC%V IN Tit -pta� Names) of Spnerta) PENELOPE MOCK Commissbn +R 1895271 m Notary PobUc - Ca111orMa � OfiaQe COYMy who proved to me on the basis of satisiactory evidence to be the persons) whose names) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me ihat he /she /they executed the same in his /her/Iheir authorized capacily(fes), and that by his /herltheir signatures) on the Instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. Comm. Ex es .tut i t, 2014 WITNESS my hand a/n�d, -o-ff- ici�al- seal.', / Signature• �"^""^'/f�� -+ Place Notary Seal Above SSgnal el Notary PuN[e OPT /OVAL though the tnrwmaton 6erow is nor rsqulred by /aw, it may prove valuaWa ro persons retying on me document and cotNd pretreat trauduten[ removal artd rlsaNacYament of Ihls /orm ro anoAhsr document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Oocumenl: Document Date: Signers) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Slgner(s) Signer's Name: L] Corporate Officer — Title(s): O Individual L7 Partner — U Limited O General Top d thumb here O Attomey in Fact l7 Trustee U Guardian or Conservator [-1 Other: Signer Is Representing: ® 2009 National Notary Number of Pages: Signer's Name• O Corporate O/ficer — Title(s): O Individual O Partner — CJ Limited C7 General Top or (numb here !� Attorney in Fact U Trustee n Guardian or Conservator i] Other Signer Is Representing: •. CONCORDIA urtivf wsi � v i�larclr 2l, 2012 Ms. Ktrrcn Haluza, AICP Plaruaing Manager City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency '"M20 Post OClice Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 RE: Sexlinger Property — Vohtntary Listing Dear Ms. Haluza: The undersigned are representatives of Lutheran High School of Crnnge County and Concordia University ovine, the current owners of the property referenced above. Both institutions were formed years ago as religious, noo- profit, corporations. Although eve are separate• we ace both Luthenau Church - Missouri Synod educaliwral institutions with the shared mission of sprewding the gospel message of salvation by grnce, through faith in Jesus Christ. We write this letter becaa�se we oppose the listing of the property as w historicwl re.ource property. 'There are several reasons wlay we - ns the cutvent owners - oppose this action. First sncl foremost, however, we ask tlmt you consider llre desu-es of the former owner of the property, our Christian sister Mrs. Martha Sexlinger. During her life here on entih, Mrs. Sexlinger was a &rend and supporter of both of our orgatrizations. She lived on the properly anti operated the orchard. As she drew closer to the end of her life, she could have chosen to seek a historical resource property listing for her home and orchard. She could have sold the property to an agriculturnl enterprise, or even gifted it to tlrc City for park or educational purposes. However, she chose to gift the property to us — luaowirag that her property was not close enough to either of our campuses to be of direct use to us, and knowing ftrrther thwt neither of us offers educational progratns that could nunke use oCtan orchard. The obvious purpose of Mrs. Sexlinger's gift to us was (and is) to have its sell the property to provide funds for our ongoing mission. As stewards of her gift, therefore, eve have entertained offers to sell Mrs. Sexlinger's property. We have discovered through conversations with Itre Clly that the use of a commewial orchard is trot iu conformance with the Qeneral Plan designation and zoning for the site. l2aUrer, the property is zoned for residential housing. Consequently, we have submitted a proposed subdivision plan that is in compliance with the General Plan, zoning and subdivision ordinance. I7evrbpin� Wise. I IoriOrab!a, and Gullivared Citizens - � — _- -_ • t5w C- ,..,o.d..vw.. . ••wsa- 000x..� • •.�.ea.. v M.iinR Cable,,Ya 1 •w =19.1200 �.. I O %•2Jil) `1 t. -. �� We have been processing n plan to subdivide and develop residential housing on the property For over four years. During that process, many consultants aitd interested citizens Iravc oIt'crcd opinions on environmental, cultural and economic matters related to our proposed development plan. Your cotmnittee, the City Planning Commission and, ultimately, the City Council will be required Eo consider that inptrt aril make specific findings regarding our prolwsal. Should you decide to ignore Mrs. Sexlinger's wishes and recomnrond the listing of the property as n historical resource property, we ask yon to consider the certain result of such action. If the properly were to be listed, it would need to remain as n residential home and home -owner operated orchard (canmercinl operation of the orchard is not allowed under the currant zarin6). Because it is not econoncally feasible to operate the orchard, and becnuse the curreru home is in a dilapidated condition, it is very unlikely that we will receive any economically feasible offers to purchase the property. We would have very Few options left, and it is likely that the property would remain in its abandoned state for some tLne. We have been inFornied that three consultants have reviewed the property to offer (heir recommendation as to whether the criteria for listing can even be achieved. �,Vc understand that two consultants believe that one criterion For listing rnlg{rt be met. However, one of the constdtants has specifically opined thnt the property does not meet any of the criteria, and that the property dues not gtralify for listing. As we are sure you are well aware, there are laws that protect religious instihuions like ours when governntcnl regulations take away n property's economic value. "there is evidence in the record before you tlrni supports a decision not to list this property. Moreover, because [he former oavner of the properly had no desire to force the perpetaaal use of the property as an orchard, and because the current owners have no inclination or desire to continuo that use on the properly, ave ask that you rccotnntertd that the property not be listed. Sincerely, Gregg Pinick E�ceeutive Director Lutheran High School of Orange County �i/,t- ' - ���- -- Kevin Tilden Executive Vice President of 1'innnce and Chief Financial Officer Concordia University Irvine