Laserfiche WebLink
Appeal No. 2012-01 <br />(HRCA No. 2012-01/HRC No. 2012-01) <br />May 7, 2012 <br />Page 2 <br />made their assessment based on a visual survey of the trees on the perimeter of the site. The <br />supporting letter to the appeal application states that the City has inaccurately characterized the <br />trees as "dead and dying" referencing the Cultural Resource Study prepared by Discovery Works. <br />The Archaeological section of the Discovery Works study from the DEIR presented the findings of <br />an on-site intensive survey stating "that many trees are in poor condition; a few trees, that appear <br />to receive water from the neighboring properties, are producing oranges." However, the <br />Historical Overview contained in the Discovery Works study includes a statement that refers to <br />the trees as "dead and dying." The source of this statement was Phil Brigandi, who is a noted <br />local historian and former Archivist for the County of Orange. He further noted that the trees, <br />"may have suffered from the "Quick Decline" of the 1940s and 1950s, or simply have reached <br />their productive lifespan, usually 30-50 years." This may refer to the current condition of the <br />grove, which is no longer fully planted and has many missing trees. The historical analysis <br />prepared by Sapphos Environmental in 1997, which is an exhibit in the DEIR, states that, "The <br />trees of the grove, while fallow, appear alive and still produce oranges." There have been no <br />specific biological assessments of the health of the trees. <br />The City received a letter in opposition to the listing from Dwight and Lowell Schroeder, as well <br />as testimony from them during the HRC public hearing. In their letter and comments at the public <br />hearing they stated that they believed the condition of the grove to be of poor quality and, further, <br />that the property lacked major features, such as a barn and irrigation system, that would have <br />distinguished it as a good example of a small, family citrus farm. The Schroeders based their <br />opinion on their family's experience of having actively cultivated small family orchards since the <br />1880's, as well as their own familiarity with the Sexlinger property through their long-time <br />residency in the neighborhood and their relationship with Martha Sexlinger, the last occupant on <br />the property. <br />The HRC considered this testimony in their decision not to list the property. <br />Contribution of Small, Family-based Citrus Operations - The appellants state that the City did not <br />give adequate consideration to the role of the "small, family-based citrus grower" in the historical <br />development of the citrus industry in its assessment of the historic significance of the property. <br />This is important in assessing the property's eligibility for the California Register of Historical <br />Resources (CRHR), which is also used as a CEQA threshold. Under Criteria 1 for CRHR <br />eligibility, a property can be considered as a historic resource if it is found to be "associated with <br />events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and <br />cultural heritage." Neither of the assessments contained in the Discovery Works study or <br />subsequent revised Cultural Resources Analysis for the TAVA DEIR found the Sexlinger property <br />to be eligible for the CRHR due to its small size and lack of connection to broader, statewide <br />historical patterns. In contrast, the Sapphos Environmental study did state that the property <br />appeared to be eligible for the CRHR under Criteria 1. <br />75B-2