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

Home Browse Search

Final EIR No. 2011 -01, VA No. 2012 -04 & VTTM No. 2012 -02 February 10, 2014 Page 4 Prior to the City Council public hearing, the City offered to hire an independent mediator so that the applicant and the opposing The Old Orchard Conservancy (TOOC) could meet and hopefully identify a development proposal that would satisfy both parties. Although the groups declined the City's mediation offer, the two parties met on three occasions throughout the summer. At the conclusion of these meetings, it was determined that they were unable to agree on an alternative acceptable to both parties. As a result, the property owner requested to move forward with the entitlements to the City Council. In fall 2013, the City reanalyzed the numerous responses to comment letters received for the development. After careful consideration of these letters, the City decided to prepare a "Response to the Response to Comments" that included an additional alternative that addressed concerns related to the preservation of the historically designated site. This new alternative, the Historic Preservation Alternative, slightly differed from the other alternatives in that it studied the preservation of the Sexlinger Farmhouse at its current location, the rehabilitation of the house to the Secretary of Interior standards, the preservation of existing orange trees on the Sexlinger parcel along with the planting of new trees where dead or missing trees exist, and the construction of 22 new residences. Areas of Controversy During the review of the project, release of the draft EIR and public hearings held for the project, three areas of controversy were identified: The eligibility of the site as a historic resource, the preservation of the property as an orange grove, and cut through traffic. The first area of controversy pertains to the property's designation as a historic resource. The initial release of the draft EIR in 2011 contained a Cultural Resources section that evaluated the property as not eligible for listing on the State or City's Historical Registers. The determination was based on the analysis that, while the property was associated with the development of the citrus industry in the early twentieth century, small citrus operations did not play a significant role in the development of Santa Ana. During the public review period, comments were received from the public requesting a reevaluation of the non - historic determination. In response,. the City hired a new consultant to take another look at the project's historic status, In March 2012, the new study also concluded that the property was not eligible for the State register; however, the study noted that the property did appear to be eligible on the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties (SARHP). On April 5, 2012, the Historic Resources Commission (HRC) considered placing the property on the SARHP but denied the listing after taking testimony from the property owner and public. However, on June 4; 2012, the City Council overturned the HRC and designated the site as "Key." As a result, the property is considered to be a City historic resource. The second area of controversy is related to the preservation of the site as an orange grove. The property owners, in conjunction with a local homebuilder, originally submitted a proposal to demolish the existing Sexlinger Farmhouse and orange orchard and construct a 24 -unit residential 75A -8