11.01 Trails at Santiago Creek 7 - Attachments 6-15 ttac men
4 - op��
��e�-�or8 t'i�
�
.� .: � .
`,�_,_y.:.� _
An Lqne�{pap Compwp[ttr
Gl���allay�Ori�a+
PO Box 2293
Orange, California 92859
May 14, �oi9
The City of orange City Council
30� E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, California 92866
_ Subject: Deficiencies of the City's 2003 position on Sully Miller SMARA
Dear Mayor Murphy and C1ty Council Members, One and AII:
The undersigned, representing the Orange Park Associatlon Board�of Dlrectors and the Orange
Park Association Rea1 Estate Committee, submit this letter to state our position that the RDEIR
on the Trails of Santiago Creek project falls to properly address the State Mining and -
Reclamatlon Act of 1975 as required by the Californla Environmental Quality Act. Please
include thls letter and all attachments in the administrative record and CEQA process.
Thanlc you far the opportunity to comment on the 2fl03 determinatlon by then City Attorney
David DeBerry that the Sully-Mill�r praperty was not, and no longer is, subject to the State
of Callfarnta State Mlning and Reclamatton AcC af 1975 (SMARA).
We belleve that Mr, DeBerry erred signfFicanCly in hIs discovery of Pacts concerning the
property, ignored key evtdence and aspects of SMARA, and was compromised in his decision-
making by the pressures thrust upon h[m by the then-proposed Ffeldstone development and
the years of Faiied oversight of th� Sully Mifler property by the Clty's adrninistrative staff.
To support our findings, an OPA team researched 100's of dacuments obtained through a
Californfa Public ftecords Act request, years af minutes and resolutfons of Plenning
Commission meetings�nd City Councii meetings, and records from the County of Orange and
the State of Cal(fornia.
We believe that these findings and evidence substantiate a broader vfew of the situatlon at
the time of the decision, and currently. We believe that the findings support the idea that
min(ng was being performed on the subject property post]anuary 1, 1976, the date of SMARA
Implementation; that reclamation plans were requested by the City of Orange staff prior to
]anuary i, 1976 at least twice; and that reclamation plans, fn actordance w(th SMAFiA, must
be filed immediately.
Pa�eiof2
From the�4range Park Assoclaaon
Da�ed May 14, 2019
we afsa belleve ma�t Itt�e e,r�derr�supports trialt years of m�sin9��9�9�doaa�
influenoed Mr. DeBeny's inourrect ded5iort. Had t��se doa�sner�ts beeri avallaWe, it wautd
have been clear that mlNng had oxurred post 1976.
1�E�e @�6eve strvngly and fir�tity tl�at tl�e�te t�der d�o�Es prat�ed fra�n aay�o4�e�s
tl�an mininy as refer�apd by t�e h�fy 2018 51NARA A�t wt�Ych dedares ti�e sne as an'area of
reglonal�ignificance"curre�tly and 3n tt�e past, and that this was deariy sbted fn a ]anuary
1993 fetter from Wm.Armstrong,Department of Conservation to Dougfas Wheeler,Secrctary
� �s WY� �{�LC. � \.O�IIIl���d �r � � w �Y31d V��y�
Coiru�urnty► De�opm�t D�n� Q�Y of Oran9�- M� De�Y�a�e 1�ig�nse E�8�
his fin�ng5.
We.are pr�e�ng s�gni�cant aac! crltEral eylcle�ce that Mr. De 8srry fafEed to tndude that
���'���Y m��.�P�P�Y.�d ot�er iidorn'�atioit pertln�t[v Qrie
arrrrsdt aonditfan af tfE�e propeit.y. We b�e�ffiat a pubHc Ite-aifng o�e tl�ls rr�er is in aat9er_
We a5k that you reVlew t111s material, and return an op(nion at the earite5t posslb�e
oppflrCunity.
Yours very truly,
, �_ .
' ; .,�� _�; ��
,
�.�,:�� �,�:��
Don Srddley La 'Ft�omas Peter Jackli
� [ co-.�.airs --- . ]
�ge Park A�odati�an Qrange P�r�c Assot�ation R�1 E�be Caie�ru't�Be .
Attachmer►ts:
(3)Gosedusi�s
(2?R�rd���l�5
(3)oec�nher 8,2ox8 t�fiom tne state 1�6rdng and c�edogy Bosrd
(4)December 10, 2018 letter fram the Slate Mfrtlrtg and Geology 8oard
C�Ri[Ic Oim.[3#.11 Man�ag�r
�"��a����•-^w••�`n1aN
C1ty of Orange Pianning Comn�issian
The CiEy aF Orange CiEv Council
DeFuencies af the City's 2003 position on Suily Mlller SMARA
Pane 2 nf 7
� �Conclusions of Investiga�ion
1. Having revlewed the David A. �e Berry memo�andum, dated ]uiy �2, 2003,
fiitle� "Fi�ldstone/Application of Mining Reclamation Law" in which Mr. De
Berry, then Orange's City At�arney, finds that "SMARA daes nor apply to khe
F(eldstone site (a.k.a Fieldstone) site." And, in addikfon, that "SMARA
compfiance does not appear to be an issue that must be addressed prior to the
City Counc9l considering the Fieidstone application," the following evidenee is
brought to your attentfon to chalienge Mr. De Berry's conclusions.
2. It is clear that the Sully-Mi11er property north of Santiago Creek was annexed
into the City of Orange in 1964 and was zoned as Sand and Gravel, and the
business use of the property was extraction mining, as deflned in fihe 1975
SMARA legislation,
3. In 1971, the Planning Commission approved an asphalt batch plant on 7.9
acres of the subject property with the stipulation that a rehabiiitation plan be
submitted to the city, The applicant`s representative indicated that
"remaining aggregate deposits on the applicants holdings (approximately 23
acres) In Che vicinity of the sub�ect property amounts to approximafiely 7 �/x to
8 million tons which ls sufficient to continue plant operations for 15 years
without hringing materiai from other areas," No plan was submitted, The CUP
became void for applicant`s failure to utilize the permit. The asphalt batch
plant was not constructed.
4. On May 13, 1975, the City Councll approved a concrete batch plant on the
property with the stipulation thafi a rehabilitation plan be submitted.
(Resoiutlon 4139 - CUP 704}. The conditions were similar ko th� 1971
approval. The location was the same. No pian was subm(tted. The baCch plant
was buEit and operated for a number of years. The permit was not to exceed
15 years.
5. Aggregates need to �e added to the other ingredients to form concrete.
6. Effective 3anuary 1, 1976, minfng operators were required by SMARA to file a
reclamation plan and a financial assurance with the State. The operator has
12 years to file the documents and the assurance funding. There is no euidence
that this was done.
7, In 1989, Blue Diamond asked for permits to demolish the concrete batch pfant.
8. in a Callfornia Public Records Act request, Peter Jacklin requested information
about the mining activities, enforcernent actions and other i�ems concerning
the Su11y-Miller praperty, No mining records w�re presented for the period that
mining took place on the property.
Deted May 14, 2Q19
Page 1 of 3
� � Conclusions af investigations
9. At some point in time after 1993, the mining lead agency role transferred from
the City oF Orange to the State of California. The state agency also has no
mfning records on the property.
lO.There are severa4 references in the otficial records of the City of �range to
mining on the property post January 1975. A recfamation plan was in order for
the property and never produced.
a. Mr. Barry Ross, attorney for Hansan Aggregates, was clear in describing
the activities through 1985 in his October 2002 letter to the Ptanning
Commission.
b. The planned demolition of the asphalt batch plant circa 1985 supports
the idea of mining on the property.
c. The City of Orange Resofutlon Number 4139 supports mining was
pfanned to continue post 1975.
d. The City of Orange Resolution Number 7348 (the Reserve Resolution) in
1989 rnakes it clear that the operator afi Sully-Mli{er would continue to
operate into the foreseeable future.
e. The City of Orange Resolution #8182 {Mabury Ranch) in 1993 allow�d
for the zone change for 12,6 acres north of the Creek. "The entlre 120
acre aggregate mining property, of which 12.6 acres forms �he project
site, has been utilized for mineral extraction for more than 40 years and
tt�e extraction liFe is mostiy depleted."
11.The SMARA kegislation of]uly 2018 defines the Sully-Miller property as an�'area
of regional signf�icance." The designation has been in place since 1975 and
places significant prohibitions on how the property can be used. These
prohibitions have been ignored for more than 40 years,
12.The regional significance�� designafiion is pointed out clearty in a lette� from
]anuary 1993 to Barbara Gardner, then a member of the Community
Devefopment Department of the City of Orange. Mr. De Berry did nvt take note
of this in his concluslons. This amounts to an oversight of the greatest
magnitude and, standing alone, discounts Mr. De Berry's conclusians almost
entirely.
13.The regfonal signiflcance designation was referenced in a number of City
Council resolutions over the years. It appears that no one paid serious
attention to the designat(an and paid only lip service to it,
Dated May 14,Z019
Page 2 of 3
� �Concfusions vf Investigation5
14.Recent conversatEons during December 2�18 between INill Arcand, State
Mining and Geology Board, and Peter ]acklin confirm that the prahibitions
mentioned in the 1993 Gardner letter remain in efFect as recently as 2018 and
spell out conclusively that the Sully-Mifler progerty must be trea�ed as an "area
af regional significance" and that nathing has been done to remave that
designation.
iS.With this information in mind, it appears that Mr. De Berry erred !n his
conclusion by leaning heavily an information and advice that favored the
2�p�ficant at the time. In doing so, Mr. De B�rry failed to take a broader view
of state law, previous resolutions of the City of Orange Plannfng Commission
and the City of Orange City Counc(I,
16,With this in mind, it's believed that the cttizens of the City of Orange deserve
a reckoning on the matter of the Sully-Miller property and request that (a) the
matter of SMARA reclamatian be re-opened, (b) the "area af regianal
significance" designation on the property be hanared, as declared in state law,
artd (3) that th�se matters be addr�ssed in a public hearing prior to any
declslons being made on the future of the Sully-Miller property,
Dated May 14,2019
Page 3 of 3
� �Research Findings
i. "It is the intent of the Legislature to create and maintain an effective and
comprehensive surFace mining and reclamatian policy with regulation of
sur�ace mining aperations so as to assure that:
(a) Adverse environmental effects are prevented or rninimized and that
mined lands are reclaimed to a usable condition whlch is readlly adaptable
for alternative land uses.
(b) The production and conservation of minerals are encouraged, while
giving consideration to values relating to recrea#ion, watershed,
wildlife, range and forage, and aesthetic enjoyment.
(c) Residua! hazards to the public health and safety are
eliminated."1
2. "Minerals" means any naturalEy occurring chemical element or compaund, or
groups of elements and compounds, formed from inorganic processes and
� organic substances, including, but not limited to, coal, peat, and bituminous
rock, but excluding geothermal resources, natural gas, and petroleum.z
3. "Mined lands" inciudes fihe surtace, subsurtace, and ground water of an area
in which surFace mining operations wil{ be, are being, ar have been conducted,
including private ways and roads appurtenant to any such area, land
excavations, workings, mining waste, and areas ln which structures, facilitles,
equipment, machines, tools, or other mat�rials or property whlch re�ult from,
or are used in, surface mining operations are located.3
4. "Mining waste" includes the residual of soil, rock, mineral, 1lquid, vegetation,
equipment, machlnes, tools, or other materials or property directly resulting
from, or displaced by, surface mining operations. {Added Deffnit(on af a mining
operation by SMARA.4
5. An "area of regional significance" means an area designated ... which is
known to contain a deposit of minerals, the extraction flf whEch is judged to be
oP prime importance in meeting future needs for minerals in a particular region
of the state within which the minerals are located and which, if prematurely
developed for alternate incompatible land uses, could result in the permanent
loss of minerafs that are of more than loca! slgnificance."9
�State Mining and Reclamation Act,July 2018,§2712.
2 Ibid,§2005
3 Ibid, §2729.
a Ibid,§2730.
5 Ibtd,§2726
Dated May 14,2019
Page 1 of 6
6. "Reclamation" means the combined process of land treatment that
minimlzes water degradatian, air pollution, damage to aquatic or wtidlife
habitat, flooding, erasion, and other adverse effects from surFace mining
o�erations, including adverse surFace ei�ects incidental ta underground mines,
so tE�at mined la�ds are reclaimed fo a usab0e. condition fhat is readily
adapt�ahle for alternate land uses and creafe r�� danger to public health
orsaf�t�y, The process may extend to affected iands surrounding mined fands,
and may require backfillfng, grading, re-sofling, revegetation, sail compactlon,
slope stabilization; or other measures.6
7. "Surfa�e mining operations" means all, or any part of, tf�e process
Jnvolved fn the mining of miner�ls on mined Iands by removing
overburden and mining dire�tly from the minera! deposits, open-pit
mining of min�rafs naturally exposed, mining by the auger method, dredging
and quarrying, or surFace work lncident to an underground mine. SurFace
mining aperations shall include, but are not limfted to:
(a) In-place distillation or retorting or leaching.
(b) The production and disposal af mintng waste.
�c) Prospect�ng and explora�ory activltfes.'
8. "Financial assurances" means a current approved flr�ancial assurance cast
estimate and a financfal assurance mechanism that is at {east equal to th�
current approved �inancial assurance cost estimate.B
9. Areas Desfgnated tv be of Regional Significance ... the Mlr�ing and
Geology Board designa��s certain mineraf resource sectors withln the foAowing
geographical areas to be af regional significance. 9
1�}.Reclamation Plan Elements. ... the following elemer�ts shail be included in the
reclamation plan: ..,
(2) The pu�ilfc f�ea►tft and safety, giving conslderatfon to the
degree and#ype of present and proba6le fufure exposure af the
pu611c to fhe site.lo
&Ibid, §2733
'Ibid,§2735.
e Ibld,§2736.
s Ibid,Areas Designated to he of Regional Signi�cance§3550.
lo tbid,�35Q2.The Reclamation Plan�b)
Dated May Z4,2019
Page Z of 6
� �Research Findings
a. Santa Ana River, Santiago Creek Arroyo Trabuco, San 3uan Creek,
and Temescal Valley Areas of the Orange County-Temescal Valley
RegEan, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardinv Countiesli
i. Sector � -Instream deposft of SanCiago Creelc beginning near
Villa Park Dam and extending downs#ream to
approximately the Newport Preeway, lz
ii. Sector K -A conglomerate deposit in upper Blind Canyon east of
Vllla Park Dam.
iii. Sector L -Instrearn depasit lacated on Santiago Creek between
Santiago Dam and Irvine Park.
iv. Sector M -Instream deposit located under the Santlago Reservoir
on Santiago Creek.
v. Sector N -Instream deposits of Santiago Creek beginning near
Santiago Reservoir and extending upstream to the confluence of
Willfams Canyon, Including a portion of Silverado Canyon,
i1.Within 12 months of ... the designation of an area of statewid� or regianat
signiflcance within its jurisdiction, a lead agency shall, in accordance wl�h state
policy, establish mineraJ resou�ce management policies #o be
incorporated in its general plan that will:
(1) Recognize mineraf infarmation classifled by the State Geoiogist
and transmitted by the board.
(2) Assist in the management of land use that affects access to areas
af statewide and regianal signifcance.
(3) Emphasize the canservation and development oP identified
mineral deposits.13
iZ.Yf an area (s destgnated by the baard as an area of regional significance, ...
then prior to permitting a use whieh would threaten the potential to
extract minerals in that area, the lead agency shall prepare a
statement specjfyfng irs reasons for permitt�'ng the proposed use, in
accordance with the requirements set farth in subdivision (d) of Section 2762.
Lead agency land use decisions involving areas des9gnated as being of regional
signiflcance shall be in accordance with the lead agency's mineral resource
managemenfi policies and shall also, in balancing mineral values against
alternative land uses, consider the importance of these minerals to their
market region as a whale and not just their importance to the lead agency's
area �f jurisdiction, �4
11 Ibid,§3550.4.
12 Ibid, §3550.4.
�Ibid, §2762,�a)
lo ibld,§Z763.(a}
Dated May 14,Z019
Page 3 of 6
13."... a person shall not conduct surface mining operafions unless a
permit is obtained from, a reclamation plan has been submfited ro and
approved by, and financial assurances for reclamation have been
approved by the Iead agency for the operatfon purs�ant to this article."1$
14. `�A person with an existing scrrface mining operat�on who has vested
� rlghts ... and who does not have an approved reclarr�ation plan shal►
submit a reclamation plan to the lead agency not later than March 3t,
1988. If a reclamation plan application is nofi an f le by March 31, 1988, the
continUation of the surface mining operation is prohibited until a
reeJamation p/an is submitted to the lead agency.nl6
15, Re: 4261- 6145 E. Santiago Canyon Road: "For more than 50 years, the
subject property was used far extractian (or mining) af natural resources,
Processing (or recycling) started I 1975 and continues to this day. Extraction
stopped in 1985. For the ten-year period of �975 to i,985, both
extraction and process�ng accurred. ... The absence of extraction
during fl�e prevlous 17 years ... Is more compatiible with the adjacent uses
••i�
16. Re: 4261- 6145 E. Santiago Canyon Road:"as stated above,prior to .1985z8
the use of fhe property eonsisted of excaaation and processing of
sand and gravel. Afker 198Si4, the use has been Iimlted to processing
without any excavatlan."
17."...the subject property20 Is zoned 5-G (Sand and Gravel Extraction) Distrlct"��
18. ... the present use of the subject property consists of a sand and gravel
`operation Including conveyer systems and stock piles and a small orange
orchard."22
19."... fihe ap�licant continue to work wfth the County and City of Orange ... to
rehabilitate theEr owned or lead properties in Santiaga Creek.��Z3
20."... due to (ts contents, and the ma�ner in w�ich it was adopted, the OPA Plan
has the autho�ity of a General Plan, rather than a Specific Plan."24
ls 16id,Article 5,Reclamatlon Plans and the Conduct of Surface Mining Operatfons,§Z77o, (a}
16 lb9d,Article 5.Reclamation Plans and the Canduct of Surface Mining Operat9ons,�2770. (b)
1�Barry A.Ross letter to the City of Orange Planning Commission dated October 7,2002
1e Da#e modi�ed from 1977 to 1985 in handwriting and annntated by handwriting that"...were made...author
Rass."
'B Ditto
20",,,situated an the north side of Santlago Canyon Road beginning at a point 400 feet west of the centerUne of
Oran�e Park Bouleva�d..,approxisnately 677 feet af frontage..,depth of a�proximately 879 feet and a �and area v#
7.9 acres."
21[fty of Orange Resolution Number 4139,dated May 13,1975, Fact 2
22 Ibid,Fact 3
z�Ibid,Conditinn 13
24 City of Orange Resolution No.7348,dated July 18, 1489,Recitals,namber 5
Dated May 14,2U19
Page 4 af 6
� �Research Findings
21."West - Industrial usas including a sand a gravel .plant, ... owned by SuEly
Mlll�r Contracting. Zon(r�g on this property Es 5-G (Sand and Gravel)."25
2Z. "That the surrounding land uses are as follows:
General Plar� Or nge Park Acres Plan
West Park "Santiago Greenbelt Plan"
{Sul�y-
Miller
operatians)"z6
23. "Sully Miller Contracting has statied that they have no plans to term9nate their
use and that future residents should be so advised."�'
z4. "Although the DEIR Indicates �hat the site is currently zoned for mining
activities, it does nat include that a portion of the site is Iocated on State
classified and designated lands, ... prior to a lead agency's (in the case,
the City of Orange) permilting a use which would preclude mining on lands
which have been classifled and/or deslgnated by the State, a Statement of
Findings ... must specify the reasons for permitting a land use which
pr�clu�Qs mineral development ..."�B
25. "... it appears t�at the required statement has not been prepared nor
submitted to the State ...the City af Orange is not in compli�nce with State
l.aw. ..."ze
26. "That the staff is in receipt of a letter from the appli�ant indicating that this is
�resently no specific plan for ultimate Use it their sand and gravef pits."3a
27. "That the applicant's proposal ... is directly related to the entire operatfon o�
the sand ad grave{ facilities on properties owned or leased by the appiicant,
and also must be related to the ultimate use oP the prapertfes after vaf�abfe
materials have been depleted, For this reasan the staff tha� the applicant
submit ideas and concepts for rehabili�a�ian and ultimat� use of the
properties.«31
ls Ibid,number 6
7fi Ibid,number 23
�'Ibid,number 24
�Letter from Wm.Arm�trong, Department of Conservation to Douglas Wheeler,5ecretery of Resources and
Barbara Gander,Community DeveEopment Department,SubJect:Proposed Negative Declaratlon for the propased
Sulley-MiUer prnject SCM�F 92121D34,dated January 20,1993,Page One
Z'ibid,Page Two
�0 Resalution No,PC-15-71,item 9,March�,1971
31 Ibid,item 10
Dated May 14,2019
Page 5 of 6
28. "Whereas, SMARA requires that if an area is designated as an, area af regional
519�11fICerlC�r for the mining Qf minera(s that prior to permittlrtg a use which
would threaten the potential to extract minera{s in fihat area, the City must
prepa�e a statement specify[ng its reasons far permitting the proposed use
+►3z
29. "... authorized to take out the needed permits fot demolition of the sand and
gravel plant lacated at fi14S Santiago Canyon Road."33
30. "That the applicanr continue to work with the Coun#y and the City of Orange
in the ongoing jaint study ancf effart to rehabllltate their owned or leased
properties in Santiago Creek."3a
31. "The uses surrounding the subj�ct property are as fallows: ... [to the] West -
Industrial uses lncluding a sanc! and gravel plant, a hot mfx asphalt plan, anci
a concrete and asphalt recycling aperation owned by Sully Miller Contacting.
Zoning for the property ls S-G (Sand and Gravel)."3�
32."...prior to permitting a use that would threaten the patential ta extract
minerals in that area, the iead agency shall prepare, in conjunction wifih
prepa�ing, iF required, an environmental document requlred by D(vision 13
{�ommencfng with Section Z1000), a statement specifying its reasans far
permitting the propased use, and shall forward a c�py to the State Geologist
and the board far review",36
33."... there would be at ieast ane public hearing required in vrder to amend ar
remove the specific sector (in this case Sector ] of CCR Section 35�Q.4} from
the area designated to be af regional significance, as this wauld be a regulatary
action of the SMGB."�'
34."...the import and placement of the materiai wc�uld require some sort of permit
from the local agency, and that woul� certainly bring up questions regarding
whether such activities were comp(eted In compliance with other State and/or
�ederal statu�es/regufatlons (e,g. CEQA, water quality permiCs, Fish and Game
Section 1600 agreements, etc.) in addit(on ta SMARA �PRC 2763)."3B
3�Resolutfon No,9778,General Plan Amendment No,l-Ol,Dated October 14,2003,p.2
3'Letterfrom R.R.Munro,Assistant Secretary,Blue Diamond Materials to City of Orange,dated August 30,19B9
�'Resolutfon 4139,Conditional Use Permlt 70a,dates May 13,1975, Following Condttfons Apply 13,p.4
35 pe5olutlon of the Orange City Councfl�Vo.7348,dated July 13,1989,Item 6(in part)
3s December 8,201$Will Arcand{State Mining and Geology 8oard}memo to Peter Jacklin
37 I bld
3e December 10.2019 Will Arcand(State Mining and Geology Board�memn tn Peter lacklln
Dated May 14,2019 �
Page 6 of 6
peterjacklin@outiook.com _
Fram: Arcand,Will@bOC �WiII.Arcand@consen+ation.ca.gov>
5��; Tuesday,Qecember 11,2018 9:45 AM
To: Peter J acklin
5ub�ect: R�:This message is for Will (updated)
Peter:
Please see my responses below in r�d.
Rega rds,
Will
Will J. Arcand
State Mining &Geology Board
{916)322-1082
CONFIDENTL4LITY No'�ICE:This cammunlcedon with Ne rantents may�onlaEn conAdenUal andlor legally privlleged Infonnatfon.It ts solely for t�e use
of the Intended reeiplent(s).Unauthodzed lntercepllon,review,use or dl9ctosure is prohibited and may vlalate applicable lauvs includtnq the Eledronic
CommuntcaUons Pdvacy Act.If you are not the Intended recipiem,plea5e conlact lhe sender end destroy sll copies af the communicatian.
From:Peter Jackl(n�peterja�klin@outlook.�om>
Sent: Monday,OecQrnher 10, 2018 5:5I PM
To:Arcand,Will@DOC<WiII.Arcand@tanservation.ta.go�>
Subject:Re:This mes5age is for Will (updated�
Shanksforthe rapid re5ponse, Will.
Two other questions-it it appropriate for,or with the legal linits of SMARA,to ha�e dumped the miElions of
cubic feet of road decan5truction or other material on the site wF�ile it�s designated as as area if regional
signi�cance�
I am not able to provide an answer towards wheti�er or not the dumping of materfal is within the legai fimits of
SMARA_ One would assume that the import and placement of the material would require some sort of permlt from ti�e
local agency,ar�d that would certainly bring up questions regarding whether such activities were compieted in
compfiance with other 5tate and/or Federal statutes/regulations(e.g.CEQA,water quality permits, F9sh and Game
Se�tlon 1600 agreements,etc.}in atidition to SMARA(PRC 2763�.
Nas anyone filed a request to remove the site from the designation?
l'�the best of my knawledge,the SMGB office has na record of a request to remove all or part of the subject sector
(5ector J of CCR Section 3550.4�from designation.
2
. �
Thanks,
Peter
Sent fram f�!ir��
From:"Arcand,Will@DOC"<WiII.ArcandCa7consenratlart.ca.eov>
Sent:Monday,December 10,Z018 5:09 P1VI
To:peteriaek!!n@outlaok.com
Cc:5chmidt,Jeffrey@D�C;SMGB@DOC
SubJett:FW:This message is for WiA(updated)
Helfo Peter:
Thanks for the information. Please note the following(wlth numbers corresponding to your points as listed in your 12/8
emall to the SMGB mailbox):
1. The City should refer#o Public Resources Code(PRC�Section 2763(a)and 2762(d)for the requlrement of a lead
agency to submit a statement to the State Geologist and the SMGB. Note that such a statement would not
automaticaNy remove the designation of the area-it is a requirement of the lead agency prior to permitting a
use that would preclude mining ofthe minerais wEthin the designated area. Here is an excerpt ofthe pertinent
language:
"..,prior to permitting a use that would threaten the potential to extract minerals in that area,the tead
agency shall prepare,in conjunction with preparing,if required,an environmental dacutnent required
by Dlvisfon 13 (commencing wlth Section 21000},a statement specffying its reasons for permitting the
proposed use,and shall forward a copy to the State Geologist and the board for revfew".
3. Yes,there wouid be at Ieast one public hearing required in order to amend or remove the specific sector(in this
case Sectar J of CCR Sect[on 3550.4)from the area deslgnated to be of regional signiflcance,as this would be a
regulatory action of the SMGB.
I hope this helps clarify. Feel free to contact the SMGB affice with any additional questions.
Thanks,
Will
Will J. Arcand
Senior�ngineering Geologist
PG 7728 CEG 2462
State Mining 8 Geotogy Board
$0'i K Street, Suite 2015
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 322-1082
(9'16)445-0738 FAX
will.arcand�conseroatio n.ca.ctov
z
, �
��1i�NG,�
R',�ir.y e n",��.�lk C
Gl�` ? ��. `t�0
4.f i�.
.!.•`�'�-y '�°��-",j.0
C.SF.9��+� -���At`r`{'t
I�j..�� �.�!`i�a
�.A�
��,..��{��4�
..,.
CONFIDENTIAUTY NOTICE:Th�s communicetlon with its corrtents may cantain confider►tlal andlarlegally privileged inforrnation.It Es sofely forthe use
o{the intended reciplent(s).Unauthorized 1nlerceplion,review,use or disclosure is prohibiled and may violate appEica6le laws including ihe�lectronic
Cammunicallons Privary Act.lt yau are nol the intended reclp`Rr�t,please contact ihe sender and destroy all coples of the eammunlceilon.
From:5MGB@DOC
Sent:Monday,December 10,2018 8:13 AM
To:Arcand,Will@DOC<WiII.Afcand@conservatian.ca.gov�
Subjed:FW:Thfs message is for WiEI (updated�
Importance;High
From;PeterJacklln<peterlacklinC�autlook.com>
Sent:Saturday,December 8,2a18 83i PM
70:SMGg@DQC<sm�b@conservation.ca.sov�
Su6ject:�"his message is far Will(updated)
Importante:Nigh
W111,thanks for your time on'fhursday.
To refresh,I called ahout the east Orange property that is referenced in SMARA 7/2018 as being an area af regional signiflqnce.
Thls Is the area east of the Vi11a Park Dam to Route 55.
The developer i�the RDEIR Is waving his hands at the sltuat9on saylag that he dumped 1,000,000's af cublc feet of dlrt on the
property {with�e city's appraval whlle the property had the dasignation)maktng It econornfcally infeasible to mine the property-
and tfierefore-thl5 Is no longer a� area of reglanal signlftcance,
As I understand our conversatlon:
1. Tlie Clty of Orange staff has to write a let�er to Che State Geology 9aard to have the regional significance deslgnatlon
removed.
Z. You wanted rne to(dentiFy the properly with the address or the parcel number
a) The number ot the recirtulated DEIR Is 2017031020.The original DEIR and this one are posted ta the City oF
Orange website.
� b) The property Is�urrently zoned Sand &Gravel
c) The s3te address is 6i18 East Santfagc Canyon Road(from the RDEIR)
d) The Assessor's Parcel Number is 37445124
e) During the year 2003,a�cording to a declaretlon ftled with the CEty oF Orange Che Rarcel numbers were
a. 093-280-07.27.29.30 and 31
6. 370•011-08,18,21,and 22
c. 370-041-12, 13 and 19
f� 5ee Item 3.l1.3 in the attached cover document for the RDEIR
3. ]s there a publlc hearing required to remove the regfonal slgnifl�ance designatfon7
As a raminder,the revtew periad on the RDEIR ends on 12/31/2a18. Please taka tfiat Into conslderetfon In your time to re5pvnd.
Should you need my help,please call me at the numher Ilsted below.
THANKS,
Peter]ack[in
7�4-381-6395(M}
�
ac men
��,F i
. ��`�`���0���
� ' C`�T'� C�.�' a.�ANGE
�A
�P�;�i�,�,��
CpU�G�
CITY ATraRNEY (T14)74A-5580 • FAX(7i4)53&7151
June d,2019
VIA EMA.IL AND FEDEX
Jeffrey Schmidt,Executive 4fficer
California State Mining and Gealogy Board
801 K Street,MS 20-IS
Sacramenta,CA 958I4
� smgb@conservation.cagov
Re: Notice to California MiningLand Geoto�y Board-Trails at Santia�o Creek Praject
Dear Mr. Schmidt:
Jt was a pleasure speaking with you this moming. The City of Orange is providing this
notice to you pursuant to Public Resaurces Code Section 2762(d)(1). As explained below,the City
believes that it has fully consulted with the Board on the Trails at Santiago Creek Project
("Project"), and that this natice is nat rec{uired, both as a result af that prior consultadon, attd
because resuming ag�regate mining operatians would nat be economically feasible and therefure
fhe resource is effectively depleted, so the praject does nat threaten extraction of minerals.
Ne�ertheless,aut of an abandance of cautian,the City is praviding this nodce.
The Project�involves 128 single-family residential units on 40.7 acres and 68.5 acres af
open space on a 149.2-acre site at di 18 East Santiago Canyon Road in the City of t�range. The
residentia! units will be lvcated on the southern portian of the Project site and the open space,
inctading publicatly accessible trails, will be located on the northern portion af the Project site.
The Project site was used primarity for surface mirun�of sand and gravel, aggregates mining,and
ancillary uses beginning in I919. Surface mining operations ceased on the Project site prior to
January 1, 1976. Resuming aggre�ate mining operations on the Project site would not be
economically feasible and therefore the resource is effectively depleted.
Section 2752(d}(i) of the Public Resources Cvde requires a Lead Agency to prepare a
statement, in conjunction with preparation of an enviranmeatal document pursuant to CEQA,
which specifies the Lead A�ency's reasons for permittin�a proposed use in an azea that the Lead
Agency has designated in its General Plan as having mineral resources. The City af Orange
General Rlan currently maps a portion of the project site as"Resource Area". The City believes it
has eomplied with 3ectian 2762(d)(1)of the Public Resources Code f�r the following reasons:
• Mining resources are effectively depleted on the Froject site. It has been mined Qf
ecanomic a�re�ate deposits, and the remaining deposits that are of potential economic
ORANdE CIVIC CENTER • 300 E. CHAPMAld AVE
;.r�nmaanrcrc�mr�ra�
Jeffrey Schmidt, Executive Officer
June 6,2019
Page 2
value are infeasible to mine because o:f the limited volume of lacalized depasits, expense
of removing the overburden (pond deposits}, and difficulty associated with excavation
logistics. Therefore,the proposed use would not threaten the potential to extract minerals
in the area and a statement pursuant to Public Resources Code Sectian 2762 is not required.
(See RDEIR Appendix I, Geotechnical Investigation, Ginter& Associates, Inc., October
2011.)
• The environmental impact repart prepared for the Project by the City (SCH No.
2017p31OZO} specified the reasons the City would consider permitting the proposed
Project's use, includin� the Project's primary objective to Iocate singIe-family detached
residential units ansite and preserve a su6stantial portion of the site for open space. The
EIR was circuiated through the State Ciearinghouse, and the Clearin�;house notice
identified minerals as an environmental issue. Therefore, the State has already been
cansulted regardin�Ehe pntential threat ta the extraction of minerals on the site.
The City betieves tbat it has fully consulted with the Board on the Fraject, and that this
notice is not required. Nanetheless,in an abundance of caution,the City is providing the followin�
reasons that the City will consider approvin�the Praject. The project will:
l. Increase housing in the Project area and the City by locating 128 sin�le=family detached
residential units an the southern portion af the Project site.
2. Restore and preserve the majarity of the Project site for open space and greenway uses, _
inctuding providing irails and recreational amenities to the community.
3. Preserve and protect Santiago Creek by abating the remnan#s of the resource extractian
activities and estab(ishin�a�reenway along the creek corridor.
4. Pramote land use compatibility with neighboring residential uses thraugh development of
cocnpatibte hvusin�praducts and lot sizes,and through the.use of landscaping and setbacks.
5. DeveIop a network of publically accessible trails thAt provide public access to Santiago
Creek and Santiago Oa3cs Regianal Park.
6. Lessen the noise, imprave air quality, and reduce traffic impacts ta surroundin�residents
from the existin�backfiliing operations on the Project site.
�. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle circuiation.
8. Imprave local circulation by widenin�East Santiago Canyon Road and restriping Cannon
Road.
Feel &ee to contact ms at�sheatz�u},cityoforange.arg if you have any questions.
S' c ely,
�� �
ary A. e tz,Cifiy Atta ey
cc: Tim McGririk&William Short,Aciing California State Geologist
m nt
ac e
Gary Sheatz
From: Schmidt,Jeffrey@DOC <Jeffrey.Sthmidt@conservatian.ca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday,June 19,2019 S:Z1 PM
To: Gary Sheatz -
Subject: Regarding PRC 2762(d}(1)
Dear Mr. Sheatr, Esq.
Pursuant to PRC 2762{d)�'i}, a lead agency is required to prepare a stafemer�t, in conjuncfion wrth preparation
af an environmenta!dacument pursuant to CEQA, which spec�es fhe Lead Agency's reasons for permitting a
proposed use in an area that fhe Lead Agency has desrgnafed in ifs genera!plan as having mineral resaurces.
Aithaugh fhis is strictly not a legal opinion, legal advice, or any constnact of the prac�ce of law, the 8oard feels
that the Traiis at Santiago Creek Praject, in the City of Orange, in the Gounty of Orange, in the State of
Califarnia, is not subject to this provision.
If any fur�her clarification is needed, or the Gity has any questions or concems, please contact me directly.
Regards,
J����y s������
ExecuNve Officer
State Mining and Geology Board
�ZNIIIfQ�
Q,�SS'��tuar�c,� 'vd.
y^,,,t-�`�l j,r..� � '?r��1, 1
q 't'�'� �'1
� �� m{
� �
� . ""'.��:• �e
'� ���
,?�., 4.�.
� '��sr::iaa5 .
State Resources Agency
Department of Conservation
801 K Street, MS 20-15
Sacramento� CA 95814
(916� 322-1082 4ffice
(916)Z41 -8099�eld
ieff rev.schmidt@conservation.ca.Qov
CONFIDEKTIAL d�PRNILEGED:Th1s elect�onie message with its contents,{ength,height,width,wetyht,glrth.densky,malecular compoaition,and
atamk num6er,may cantain f�ormatbn,documenls,drawings,hEeraglyphfcs,petrogtyphs,cave drawings,Cw�ger paintiags,addrese lebels,pooriy
construed graffili,rudimentary sidc-figu�es,dud tape projects,uap cades,andlor work product that may be confidenlial,privlleged,sensitiva,tap secret,
highly toxic,or simply malodorous.The Informatian is intended solely for lhe use af the ind'nrklual(s),pa�des,ent�ies,peoples,persons,persimmon6,or
wildlife nemed e6c�e.If you have recelved this transmission in error,please choose one flf the foqowiny maans far its destniction,eliminata,taRninate,
oblNerate,annihilale,incinerate,exferminate,deracinate,Lsolate,spoliate,mutilate,masttcate,Ifquldate,excorlate,lacraate,lsolate,ablate,extfrpate,
super-hydrate,ar s'wnply hit the ole'delete button.Your fuN coopefdtian,complianCe,complic'd7r,Caercement,cotor blindneSs,end caoperatbn aro abty�
apdy,artfully,absurdly,and absdutely appreciated.
1
. 1 i
I
I
I
tt ment
ac
City of Orange
Community Development Department
Memo
To: Stacy Blackwood, Director of OC Parks
From: Bill Crouch, Community Development Director, City of Orange
Date: April 1, 2019
Re: The Trails at Santiago Creek
Santiago Creek Greenway and Grasslands Open Space
Introduction
Described below is an opportunity to enhance the County's regional trails, parks, and
open space program in the area of East Orange. Through a property dedication of the
Santiago Creek Greenway and Grasslands Open Space area from private ownership to
the County of Orange, the Santiago Oaks Regional Park can be expanded and amenities
added as part of the entitlements for the proposed Trails at Santiago Creek project. It is
my understanding that in July and August 2018, Orange City Manager Rick Otto had
preliminary discussions with you related to the Trails at Santiago Creek project and the
proposed dedication of property. As the development project has progressed further
through the entitlement process, City of Orange staff is prepared for more detailed
discussions with the County related to the dedication and the trails and open space
component of the project.
The Project
The Trails at Santiago Creek is proposed as a low-density, single-family, clustered
residential development with a protected greenway/open space, enhanced by Santiago
Creek and interlaced with a variety of multi-purpose recreational trails available for use
by the public. The privately-held site is located between Santiago Canyon Road and
Orange Park Acres to the south, Cannon Street to the west,the Mabury Ranch community
to the north, and Santiago Oaks Regional Park to the east. While the site is comprised of
approximately 109.2 acres, the project proposes approximately 68.5 acres of dedicated
greenway and open space lands. The project's open space and trails will provide a useful
link between Santiago Oaks Regional Park to the east and downstream trails and
recreation areas to the west, as well as to the City's existing trail network adjacent to the
property. The maximum numbers of single-family detached dwelling units shall not
exceed 128 units as established by the proposed Specific Plan and the low-density
character of the project will be consistent with the adjacent neighborhoods.
The Open Space
The 68.5-acre open space area planned in the Trails at Santiago Creek project is
comprised of natural hillsides, re-established grasslands, a restored Santiago Creek
riparian corridor and a managed vegetation/fuel modification zone. The open space
includes two specific zones: --. - — - -
City of Orange
Community Development Department
Planning Area A— Greenway and Santiago Creek Riparian Corridor(40.2 acres)
The Greenway Open Space and Santiago Creek, with its riparian and wetland habitats,
provides an environment that supports both onsite wildlife as well as a movement corridor
for regionally oriented wildlife. The Santiago Creek is an important tributary to the Santa
Ana River and provides a link to Santiago Oaks Regional Park and the natural open space
beyond. Offsite to the west the Santiago Creek open space corridor connects with the
Santa Ana river environs with its ponds and tributaries.
Planning Area 8— Grasslands Open Space (28.3 acres)
The Grassland area located south of Santiago Creek, has been disturbed over the years
due to commercial sand & gravel operations on the site and will be restored as a natural
grassland interspersed with other plant communities and seasonal wildflowers. This area
also includes the Managed Vegetation/Fuel Modification zone and acts as a vegetative
buffer befinreen the open space and residential neighborhood.
As a component of the proposed Specific Plan and Development Agreement related to
the entitlements, the developer is funding $4,100,000.00 in landscape, trails and other
improvements for the Santiago Creek Greenway and open spaces. Among the amenities
planned for these areas include:
• Multi-use trails
• Trailside rest-stops
• Trailhead, informational signage, shade shelters and kiosks and related amenities
• Storm Water and flood control improvements
• Managed vegetation and fuel modification
• Passive outdoor uses
In addition, the developer is proposing to fund an additional $3.0 million for trails,
equestrian and recreational amenities in the East Orange area. Further, the developer is
proposing to dedicate the 51-acre former Ridgeline Golf Course site to the City for future
open space and recreational uses.
The Recreational Trail Network
The project provides a recreational trail system that avails the greenway open space and
Santiago Creek environs in Planning Area A, and the grasslands environs in Planning
Area B, to the community of Orange at large as well as the project's residents, thus
becoming an integral part of the City's and County's trail master plans via connectivity
opportunities.
Throughout the open space in Planning Areas A and B, a planned network of 10-foot-
wide multi-use recreation trails will meander across the land providing public access to
the restored open space and the Santiago Creek environs on this once private land. A
bridge located in the northeast portion of Planning Area A will provide trail access across
the Santiago Creek environs. The trail system will connect to the existing Santiago Creek
Trail along the northern boundary and on the west side at Cannon Street Trail access to
City of Orange
Community Development Department
the residential neighborhoods will be via a number of trail paseos allowing for hiking and
bicycling access, and via the handy Creek Linear Park in Planning Area B.
The Expansion of Santiago Oaks Regional Park
Lying in east Orange alongside the Santiago Creek, the 1,269-acre Santiago Oaks
Regional Park is a nature lover's paradise. This secluded refuge offers hikers, bikers and
equestrians the natural charm of mountain vistas, an orange grove, a meandering creek
and a mature forest of many different species of trees. Wildlife abounds and a series of
interconnecting trails leads through shady groves and to a lookout that features an awe-
inspiring view of Orange and the surrounding foothills.
Planning Areas A and B are natural extensions to the Santiago Oaks Regional Park. With
the critical trail linkage, additional open space, riparian habitat, and proposed amenities,
the 68.5 acres of open space would be an excellent additional to the Park. As the property
owner is willing to dedicate the open space to the County upon receiving entitlements, an
expansion of Santiago Oaks Regional Park is within reach. Therefore, I welcome the
opportunity for our project team to discuss this matter with you at your earliest
convenience.
cc. Rick Otto, City Manager
Frank Kim, CEO
City of Orange
Comrnunity Development Department
� - �
� .
`� ��`�;` ��������+�i,�N`�'.;�
,� ���
���;�� >���A4���� ✓ �� ����� � �' n� Y.
A C i'� �*��'` 4 d��yry�,� .S F :
�5�. � � �� 4� ag�d�. $ � < v,
y1�. ' �e #".`e�� ,S'�,�� �*�a*"��'" �,, �,, _ a
� »� �� . . ��^�,,,�,�' �3i(+ � � .r . '.3e s �1'H���T�' �z.�� ., � ',F�k�,'
�y;"�: �r.ti- "`' "'�'� � � `��•- vy��`� ; .'� fr"�t ��a�.c - y � �, ��zs�.�
x dv c�".�', � a-- �y� r;
.�^ u�" '�`�'.,�'�b� � �" �"i�1.�.�vV"*�G.y j:.�C �+ �:�J S�,¢�` R y. � '�$.�{Y a'' �P 4
� .�.. ..� '� � � • �L � 0 2#§;.,.�.. �' ����q { k � . �Rl� �' , a'�. .:
%��r.�� � �.e T
la, °S� ^� �'�C��+aati.�.�.a^, 4.�,�'�� �� "Y`Y* Y,...:. � ., ���n�� ��'"'i �,�,y -� J�``�+,,��� � "�.�'� �4
..� , < x"=�3�:��+, � �x . i �aa ��.s�" Y� �,"g*,�r�y� �� �" ..
r��1 ,��� 8$LFtI Y `+�,�., , X :: e � u @8r�� p��i �1� �'�'�'F'd��� s�.�� 3 z�
� �"° �� � �:� � � m�x� y��
�,'�;. Tr�� ��J� `�"' ��'� � � � �s�GRA �1 P�'`i a � � �-_ ��^ �^;,
�,r..� � x � .f``�'�` ��"�`n�. , „a� rr'�e�'�« x � m n t ��.�*..: � s� .z.� �.
-�p '�"�"" n �� �. ��, �� � °��,���QP�N��F�AGE ����������; �
�' �
� � �� �e�� ��� �v� ; � �`���� ���� � .�����,-t���"`��`'y*� �� 'y�
:. Ly. � � ��' �� `� �` � �. ,�`�`:xRAB��� � � �,,.�.,:c �a�� �"�' ��;E,�� � �� .x� �� �`.� �
�,��, " �r :�a� t �R �? -. ��, ���s� � -.,."��'.,.
� f � �_� � �� ff �°��,k� � � . �fi.��^'�y� k S
n �Y ���.:+�M1'`�P 5 �. �..� 4, K`.^'Ev
�L�
�`•"81� �''.�. � �.. �'�e�'� 's'�a. '�r�,k.� k .���, �, ,� �����iyi,l i�k� ��'<. i,�' I�I I�" � � y,'
: t �. �. .. s, ., � ,.-� � e... � r��.. ,*.. "�-vw
_ �,`; ' �
� ' . �v " ; , �4 �� �r
i.
f.�� S� '� �"r � �
` .� ,� ��' � � _� x �`�
. - „e,. c t� � � �` q,:�,
"� r � r , � � � '�� �� '��A''�
��, ,,�."�ty� -�i�C+ �� '�', n�• � �, ^N '� . �.�. �,�'`� � �a�� � �
�y,v' g.' a`-- �"`*` x, w .� �� �� . ,�?.',§�m
� � �a �-�. "� � ��� ''�R� � ,�'a
.. ,,� :. a m 7 a�; 4
s� � �` $g v ,��s� ��y'rc
'���� �� ��a�a�}�� �" s�, � � ��$� ��ri � � r��: �,��, �� t' . $r,�,
�S ;.�i ^��5 ��� � ��� ?"'�%�. � t�� € 1 .` t�'�°9�"".�+�` �€;' ?�� ,. k f '�- :• ���_����,
w , ,
� �� � 1 � I� �l
� � ...+* �- � ' z. `�' � �� � � �.� ��� � ��� y �t� ��� �
: G � "?i y..
<..,�,m.7«-t, �.� t �As.,,,�.�-.. � �N'�' y a€�n-� �"� � � s,� �� �,,� ��.�.��. €,' {?��, L
� r .
, � �
>>
?t y� � �" j
vr� '�^'' ,.^'�., �";, a
��^ �
^'t� F� .. 3c � ��, .. �"� � � .r .
�fg����f�� �� +.� i.€�+,�' _�'s �� '�ar,w��. `�
� �T�1��A�.�t b���i 1F x�'io�utl Me�tic�fs�g, �'z =. �
;�°�as�eatlaR�7'`saits�H►k�iKattiotss)��� '�'
� , �
�7r81 C��%�Ta�ny'�'�1Aa�bucy��c`}�''t�i��h�����, " `
;
�,����� ,�,.��.�.�,�� , , °.. _ � __ . .
.,.�_ .�. . -_ ,
Eathibi�t 4.14
b � Prellm�ria Open.Space .a�d T`rails l�'Ian:
�
m ry Greenwa�,
�� ,;� �?� anti:�go Creei�S�aeci.fic Plan
c`���.�ix; _
The'Trail��at S
� • . . -
� � � � � � .
-'t.. ' Y w �• '. I`9.:P
z"."^�a� �r.^'k� �+. � , ��. �r �''t� . �� "5..� t ..p� �� .. ,* , � S��� ...y .#'�' .✓Kz°*LL `��g� "a1;S,���4t4a.e t``�.�i` t",� 4 i ".� �'�'�.�yqy�p jr�:
,'�• S ,�
!�" ,�.`�` .t.g! �v �" " � '`�;,f� � (.�� t�Ly�' � �. a �.�����.. �..�v° th �6., k'�5Lq6�.1A $}'Q R'°e�*,. ��y!
`0.,:a� � � t � t� '� k� � r
4✓'�,,�.�,( ��;,,,�,3'",y, a i, d � �. � , J�t" �;�, �w" x�,'r.a`.�x'�.p�'�`r�»9,6���fs g,b �a�`°y+�"�,�� °" f�� �_���g '�4�� ���
/'• � jk��O'� � � s f ye V �(''�. ♦4.�.} ���. �'T'�I A � � ��q��,;°+�� T �� �4 ,.4 \
��`�y����.*+ �,�,��.tra ��` J ��g ,w� �`.-,�.�„�,�yC,� . e +nc"`«�}�ly. g??. �"'�.3., •� `.y � �a�j��6 g��. 4 Ex�t.�i���i��E.��"'i����"�,36�ti.
.h �y �� 'x�'�, rr��.� ��s�k,t
�' '+f?�'�i`L�.�''`�����;.r ts*~ .�am...."ri�'' z _�",L'�'.�� �"a'S�+£�'e`4.� y��.S��, a.�` 4•�,5,� •e� '.•%r?x'-C rr..,.' ..,_...w �,t..*pa��a��v,',"
S":•°�'� �..,a'u,���r .Y. '�i`l '� . "�i;���k�'� "es ir�v^.- \ �:`.`Si°�-. d b`��a� `"'Sc\ �•�rF'f/" ,K�y� x� ' r '�"'F�^'::...-:^- •`s '��coa �
� � �i '� '��^a�.'"' , a+.ea �( _bfr k�(�.".`p��',` y.�, ¢_ aN � 9�M1k a` �.'`'t�_... l�' f � � � �� . ` .. ��'Kj
�,��"�" .�,., :-`� 1 aR�� 1 . � �. .���1 .sa>'^�'R,4'.'C°�,.ti��„i �'�.T r��i•�!'�•y�t,.^•.3-,} . .�,,,,,•J,�,ya'°'��,y���1.��,�aa� " �,j s}..i �;'�.,�, •:e +,""�«-„'i
ix"��# 4 � 5.�.� ` . ..'J�i�' �•u +aj A@. 'y�._ ...., } tft.`$: �,.jaa C �°`�ff9�F5�:3s x 'o^Y� R .{.��. .''"'u :�
y.t�?,��f � $������t �''� ,t�y`•. �F���+��.,��•�q�S�i,}�,s�'�' ,��L� p� t�� tm. .4 � ! a.� ,�-*.�. '
� �t,_9 hro,. �i. t 9r.��� r•� !� },��� y�t �""a t.. x'� 1`°`.pr,�fy �,��:E7i. !EL ...�, �Ssst��4'�''�.�aSr�.s�'x���k.'a p���.- 9�g1�«.. .�'.��y'�5.�.�• sa`;,f'r er, ;"�;.. ;� x � �
,6��y..�.� ,� ,♦ s t(�:: ` '�'��'i`�, Z .�:�.a�it`�A�+k�'t'"�; 'p:X,'���� "�j'�.�'���Dfi4'� ��a`'E,;`` ��CY4�� '�'�$,�yy:.�'a��i' . .�� ,,,w,+�:.. • w
°�".� '"� € 19" ��'�yr • f% �f'�. � `� �J�"�' . ,�i s�. q�`.�'.t� y�� „. �`��. n ta`�� '��.w•-,-tisi:�� 'S. "^*a...,ww.
+k�` ' .�' "' 1'- 41.. a iEn � ..av �- �, '"� ��OL` a�i€•. �4i.� 1fa> > -wr��' ^��'A:•• �<$
,� � r�, -�. �`; a tg v z �� ��.�j'r�`y., r`(s�fi 0 !r Yyy`'i3 .x..�,�ae .,d.,..,� ,t •
, �y
.
h,
� t,� .y.i+,� � , a: • �p�,.'"^,�-�L„�< .�., ,.� v-��F'ti`�&' t�;!� G.��''a'4 �'~��^',��',�ae� �j.:-6$ r �P�°F6s�� � �!:.�;� J' . � r..�..,.�,..�'
1''r �G,:'�S ,� � `r, �° y:�,.,<ep'#�` [,y�a ��' � �y�i�.a1�tt^s �s�..�;sc �i a4r .µ' c f �i�, 'r^;�s'�} . � ..-�'���
���+y�i; -,�ay„ ��:i.,.. '!�'�.'-'��`�a�.'h'4 i�i r,{�.@..,.N'�tc,.�,d4;�a..;}`#�+�. si� A�q,����v,$i�w.-�. �t15 . �'r�7.A$.- ��»��#at{�". 1� ��%..±".r,..s ... b'c.a�y,"�.�.; ,.
�� � G �".�` .`ti a"'�;.-fi'.'�t, 4y���};;r„�w_ �, k � ^,.,<` � ' t.. :,� , _ .;�.
����;�'� �� 4i ,,d +.,,,, ����`��s����`�,��F��'�v ats���t.� '£�,.. �,'��. ��`b�s����h.� � � �`4�� `*4�n "`�„&� ' `�,� _ . .� � , i �,�r}��«.r• ,., �1��. ^.-+��. ?
�s� �; � � � � x��� �� .� ,��iy, �,. �'!�'S .��a, ,•*�,`�.:^'� • �" �R� ,�+r
.
-� �q�s�`'w' , '"��° c�p � a" �� �"�`�`�.`�'�„"4'� <�1�"���� �,'•�r�' ����,����� �*' � :i ....... ,::�'#�`u� . �`,� �.`'S;
""�m''A�.� � `.���"rs�� y� .�}`�,�,^� ,}�."�f F"%:C a f x4. .��,F� t�',,�,�a�T+ °j�m^' � � . �� � '" �s 'e.E � 5.
�4�e� �}��� A�'���¢�t�j�ay.�-"... �.� �..,,, u���''�r" r r�,�, +�'?�F f �..+:'�. ;�.•-.,-.. ,� ;r �g�,,' ... • � *�' .
[ R� ..., x tA '+ '�t w�� �
% ��'ri��l 9�� I .� \ L~4� .�.F'a .f' �*�' ' :°�" �},rfi . J � �. �� �.� �'�`� W ♦�ry'f
A '4
'Tk.�•• ��y,��, g �r�i +� � � '�s4 r y � �� � ��,� s.r 'T . 4 . �y, .. • f �:.,
* �. .-
. .
, y .�
L'�r��i��y.��+' S�'a."'r-„.ew.�..�_ # � `O tf ;i�'� � �: ���b���� �: ���• �'a ��`'ej �` �t' � � ti .
� «« �
�� Y�,r S . .� � 1.. �.
�� � .'�- /.`r-' -,,�,�. � "��,� ,�z$,�:, �j��5� .-�9�}, ° e� �""�r'. L. *:� :'. - . ,r� "�..
.. ...r �q}�+1� '� � ����t6� e iy � �X !. �".�w A Qk`y ,� y .s
� LL r�,,,
i � a�,a°•�k�•,�,$'4. ,,,»`,,.•"'�g y > .i� �+ �' ���� xc t'� 3..t•�S�' { �s;R T �� , � t-t .,�'�&,., �`w i q _ � ��� r e,�
s ' k
�. , . .�
' �. V.i,r` ��^ °,�'�� N��. ` sx�`y•t'���^� ��� . .'�,.�.✓f' »d:,��i.G�'f�£����`��g9�' �c� a�i.� `,�.,y),,.x �`�`�.i j f� a ��KN �y ..' ,.�t�. �
V.�t � . �
� � ;�-''`�`o, ��'�,`��-'�"3"�`y v�'� s �i.'���c11•h�li�.+�s���'a4�Yt�" ��y a � ��0''( �j . ,.. �f�,��`('1�� � , �v., � , -..
� -�.+ ��,A'F yad••1yl°.'Kij -t� i .a''M-r'��' t'� Y q ,sY,}.>;v1"�+�� '�`� .4 �r!^� r '�' � tz�'�.�.+�! �[�!f i't� t�-'\.:�/.�/ 6if�� �4).p, '�' � �',����
" �� k tr.. y i€i4 �y`*��`���i i��:��`� •� �! ^��;'A� � �,a�s . r't Y 1 c` � . .,� �a,. .h . .. � � .�
°�7�� � y � izr`'s.�y, ,6'3ir ." �.. 4 , e �t„^��r�y�z�( ;�i['��3t �,`«:� .� . :"< .q-��.�>°: (/,��jj j/���,�(}'/p�` �. �}!}.j}� (��j{j���/ . t`� .
r4�'�� R 1 MH*;^,�� .'�' .+���i.k;j�iTx'`e�,¢p�F��R�4�N��.� 4X���w�.�.�N'�Yx'��,gy, r . '���•y."��IT.���•s+�M"/ �I R! f�/' '�R.w"R( i'"#� ''�Et .r .
;sy . �Y H' ` �
e� �� � M� rt'�ea �r �.er�°� � r�" .r^ " 'r- � +` r fi`".�'-k�
t g,�?�' x � V !• .. � .�.��M �',,�^`,,�` .a .• �;..�a �, � .,�� ..� r",�L,�;r ,�, '
�.�. �..�.�... '�' tb�,�x$��F �*aP f ,� }X . . � �'�m���;�� � . pa`'1,$ " �?�< �' v»="' � � t� �i�i"..`���` . � `� 'k ` .: � 4 � ,
..�.,�� �z..`!�`�,fi£�. ."`` a.�. � ��,;.,�f � ;r, . ;,,,� "�,nw X"„,�� $`��..�����'�'`.7�� ,'k, x;,,� � � `$�,��`�� f ��,+� 4 � L �w
i `�° -�^�'
�,��"����.�„�i��• r� "r,�., �.c,��'+.3� ,g'�`'I�`.. .��,.�+' �*'` g,wt�, �y � i9�ir�---���:�C��� «L ^u. �"� �aY ��.w; 1' g ��.
. _ ,,
���� �.t`�.�a'��°. .,, , ��,v, �,. �`5 :. �> y�"x � y�.�.t�. �a�°�r$'�• }�.�,a�`�`' w4�� �*.r^ .. � `,'��
�� ��s-sda1,��y� . . s't'" ��.�'�'� �..,,,,/ '�°'�'4'�"��� �v. £� .��.•$r��""��tijkt`�L�1yr�..�s�'� ,`��`'`'�.s��e+ � �. � T� ��`'". . . *..a;:
��� �� �i.�r,.�, , ����,,.�s""er'.�^� �s .i°�{,�.5; � , � y.�+ s��� �4... i��i 8�a _��,�'gp »�l l��`; .��,��.1�,tiy y, �� �. �,�_"• .�}p � ���.
��� ,r;r� . � � � �'� �. � ��'' t ; '��t- :t �o �' wti.H �<��3 G� „r t„�*t;: y� ; ',. .�w�a�
,41 �' :"°� p ,i a � -v�,Y$ . .�r�,�.. . ,P ?#t�,d �:v. . -! +:�, � � t.
���. ,3 �°,,� l. .r+� r ,�,: ti# ti �lg° 'Y� e. �'x�#.� �'"ar�i 1'a Yf�r�,' " .,�-., ; �f,,� k��
�s�`"' , � s'�� � �ia�a� � .S;y � "� � s'�.�� '-=�...�.. � ;�' :t
�t ,t!`,` 4 rt;" ,�Y . � 43 �,N G�- xC ," „„�"'`,�.:_.., 4 � o�'` ��;. �t;i a,,`"fr t�
F��'� �,° � w�' �M�'' ��'e�,"_�' �"•:�.�*�,� �};^�,.���'� "�. ��•�:� �';� �;,�, F.. " "� �
F ` . �,�.��tr.i.s«'.s�',.f'� +�dr ,,t.' h" ^ . .�w•- 9�`�R�y^s.�.¢�..t�i,�pS� �,,`,a` '��_'^"'��w'�°w� }r .. .�sg�" ' _ � «``�
� � � ,. fi� '� ��-' ��� �\ .y �1 Y � +. �' Y"t,�r i�we� � .1pe��� {b� } .w�'j+C"'fi'R 3 'k
e .
�� y .e�� �/ x� sFr�.:i .tk 'a.c.�. �a."'��. 3�°r.t �t Ki� � ,�+ . �. .c�l** s'��..'� i� 0.... �'"A ,z 1 �t:
. ,
�. 1 ��p
.j,� a • ..; "R^�::.._.�'•�§..���,y,d 5t ._._Y�;p. Y u... •w�-^it .�. . «,.r �'°z^�tt�„ " �y,` ;.'a,�� z1 �c �, if_S��`..-�.�'�'� ""'� . :">j. �s �. � ri
iy.� �S$R .m�•� �d�°�aRF�����ti,t^_ai £:'��4Y ��..' �y:�M� i'�`;��j� �_ �L'�,�fi 6FR :tM«i��� �~�,k6� tl l�.��-'` �Y,y�*��i" ... ��� E 1 ti�fw s�.f
,�,J:a� ,py� �;�s4 x�r�.�>t .«- • ' �, +�.».,��„'�'M� �" � j~� ,T�=r�,�atr� zA�-r��� {i �R^ .h �n��. 'y . Q 'k;�.�"t.
'°� o ,.q� '� ��. y �.l � t.n t u� f'y� � nY � �� 't - .�f F
t�c {E .�a✓„ek.�' ...4 't`��.. % '� Y � 4 y x x*�rr� �' Z+1'' �
'�Y°.4i��, �� } :�' '�1`.k�'�„�.,�. �� � ���i ��,} +e f � 4 � % � .,�s '0;,;r,y� ae.� .♦Y� 1 1� y •
'��.� ,.a y.�+���, a; ^� "• tj��;�� �y��,,,.��a' q�T ' �'•s��r.'''`�'�s} ``r�+;��t-�:��t",� :� ^Y'�� w �Y
G l 'd � � � �� Y E�ii j t y� i T 4 C� ,,y
���'"'°` �£S� ���,y���.��^ " ri�t°;.� l��kr �...� � ��y �. S,J. �a.x.�. �a,C'., ��f� ,�, d A��g'..�'1ry�f �Y}y7, p��;�}, w'°°":...r� ,�)a�t+e.� '1..; � `1�
�C��2'a��i �•�.t" � ��,vi."_,TM SF+i. �.a � C.V' ti� ,a.�S� �� 7 � K� �r � �' 4£^t �a i4i''�.%_i "�' �t'�"AF,�� �` , .
r�v.Y;,� >;� �':'✓'�+ r�'- �i���';;i.�i. ��•fy� ' "�t,st�i :���'- .;F'*�:^:���^`e�'`�V`�io,si.�'�y,� ��" <t+wr f a�r^ i,a-�w. .4iF�
/ 1 1 1
� � � + l � � l � � � l��t
�'��
ttac ment
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
C Communi Resources
tY
Our Communriy. Our Commitment.
DYLAN WRIaHT
DIRECTOR
OC COMMUNITY RESOURCES
CYMANTHAATKINSON June 25, 2019
DEPUTY DIRECfOR
OC COMMUNIIY RESOURCES BII) CCOUCII
ROGER UMINSKI C�mmunity Development Director
DIREGTOR City of Orange, Community Development Department
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, CA 92866
MIKE KAVIANI Sub ect: The Trails at Santia o Creek S eciflc Plan
DIRECTOR � g p
OC ANIMAL CARE
Dear Mr. Crouch:
SHANNONLEGERE
DIREGTOR
OC HOUSING&HOMELESS This letter follows from your memo dated April 1, 2019, and the subsequent
SERVICES meet�ng we had with you and the project applicant at OC Parks Headquarters
RENEE RAMIRE2 on May 15, 2019. As referenced in the project's RDEIR and in your memo, the
DIREC70R applicant appears to propose that approximately 70 acres of land and creek— .
OC COMMUNITY SERVICES designated as Planning Area A(Greenway Open Space and Riparian Corridor,
STACY BLACKWOOD 40.2 acres) and Planning Area B (Grasslands Open Space, 28.3 acres� — be
DIRECiOR dedicated to the County of Orange as long-term land owner/land manager in
OC PARKS conjunction with the City granting entitlements for this project. Please be clear
that at this time, there is insufficient information for OC Parks to even review a
SHERRY TOTH ro osed land transfer, let alone recommend that the Coun}�� Board of
AGTING COUNTY LIBRARIAN p p `Y
OC PUBLIC LIBRARIES Supervisars conditionally accept an offer of dedication. I understand that the
applicant may be presenting to the City's Planning Commission in the near
future; thus, it is important that the commissioners understand that the County
is not agreeable to accepting fee title to any land at this time.
While OC Parks is certainly supportive of the remediation of this degraded site,
the restoration of the creek and riparian habitat, and the implementation of trail
connections between the fantastic network of trails within the Orange Park
Acres Specific Plan area, the project plan is insufficiently detailed for us to
undertake an assessment of any proposed land transfer. As we discussed at
our meeting, numerous elements are unclear in the project materials that we
have been provided and/or reviewed within the RDEIR; elements which would
have direct bearing on a recommendation to our Board to accept ownership of
any of the open space acres resulting from the approval of this project.. To
complete an initial assessment of the dedication proposal, we would require
more detailed information including, but not limited to:
- Map of open space or park parcels to be dedicated, showing precise
boundaries.
- Identification of alf existing and planned utilities, v-ditches, storm drain,
and other subsurface infrastructure within the proposed dedication; as
i
well as all third-party easements and/or encumbrances on title.
�1�p��g - Geotechnical information detailing the impact of proposed
grading/fill/construction on creek banks.
isoa2 0�o MVFORo ROAo _ Hydrologic information detailing impact of existing and proposed storm
IRVINE,cA 92602 water/draina e into creek Note: the creek se ment immediatel
PHONE: SG6.00PARKS g � 9 Y
Fax: 714-667-6511 upstream from the project site is owned by the Orange County Flood
THE TRAILS AT SANTIAGO CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN
PAGE 2 OF 2
JuNe 25,2019
Control District,who will also review all hydrologic models and data provided by the applicant).
- Information regarding any mitigation requirements from regulatory agencies(e.g., Army Corps
of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, California
Department of Fish and Wildlife) th�t would trigger long-term management obligations or
conservation restrictions for any portion of the proposed dedication.
- Information regarding the proposed fuel modification zone dimensions and management plan
(Note: any portion of the proposed dedication that is within a fuel-modification zone adjacent
to the planned development should be dedicated to the future HOA or individual property
owners).
- Additional information / reports / analysis concerning the overall environmental condition of
the property.
- Detailed information regarding the developer's proposed contribution of $4.1 million in
"landscape, trail, and other improvements". Of concern would be the cost of stormwater and
flood control improvements, as well as the proposed bridge crossing over the creek at Trail B
into PA-B. It is unknown whether the proposed funding is adequate even to cover those
features, let alone the recreational improvements. Additionally, the bridge crossing may
require regulatory agency approvals, triggering a potentially lengthy and costly permitting
process.
- Conceptual Restoration Plan for areas designated as "restored open space".
- Plan for cleanup of site including trash and debris removal, invasive plant eradication, etc.
We recognize that some of the aforementioned information may not be readily available until the
applicant is closer to the building/grading permit process, but each of these elements should be
conceptually planned for and addressed to provide a better understanding of the project and the
proposed dedication.
Thank you for keeping us informed as the project progresses.
Sincerely,
�
11 � �
� .
Stacy Blackwood
Director, OC Parks
cc: Rick Otto, City Manager, City of Orange
tta m n
c e
_. . _ ..... . . .. _...
�, ,y�
-:.r�� : . ��� " 3lrt,�4t"¢$;'�e � p .��r�f,�r�y`� ����_�3„��`�4-��'.Y�1 .
�] �
,���,�. $.�,�: _ � �wr���„� �, il��k�"��,,, ����,��� �f
; �` ; , . _. ;
ti �
��
.� ���� - . �k � ��. I� 3 , I
,`.� ii:.. .:. ��:
.. .:� .�.��� �
..:��\1 .. . �. �.' . . � �¢.
L� ` t��+" �
. . . _
;:
� ,�ti ��� ��� ��� t��.
`Y _. �
�SCGA � "� `�,�,��
. � ;��
.�
s:: ,�'3.; ^�,;;
;. ,.
: ,
o�cers:and Mr.Robert Garcia,.Senior;Planner ,
DirecEors City of Qrange;Community Deveiopment Degartment,Planning Division
;.1nhn T.Moore, 30�E.Chapman Avenue CQMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'
P�stdenr Orauge,CA 92866 RECEtv�n
Pamela Gslera Re: Draft EIR—The Trails at Santiago Creek A� 0� 201�
vice Presrdent CITY OF 4%ciii�if.�F
Dear Mr. Garcia, „
'::::;Dayid Piper,
secr�tary This letter provides comments on the draft Environmental Im�act Report dated Februaiy 23, ..
r�easurer. ,, ,
"2018 for the Trails-at Sautiago Creek Specific Plan(tlie'"EIR ):~We-appreciate�t�iis oppoitunity���-°
to comment on the grvject. ' ..
' The Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance is a nonprofit cfiaritable organization dedicated to
Advisory Board improving public use and enjayment of Santiago Creek.�ur mission statement is:.
;;�1im oonovan, To create a greenway and trai.l system along the general course of Santiago Creek
; >Natlona/Parks and to preserve and enhance its ecological,scenic,historical and recreational
;:`service resaurces.
Shrdey Grindfe,
C9mpaign Reform we Su ort Creek :Trails and Q en S ace. We.have reviewed-the EIR fram:the perspective of;:;.
Activfst �p
our mission statement and we be ieve that.the trail system and apen s ace allocahon descnbed iti'
the EIR`are very supporhye af our vision;for the Santiago Creek Trai1 and Greenwaq Tliey
Peter Wetzel, provide a m;ajar part:of the adde.d trail needed to.linlc tfie exis.ting Sant�ago:,Creek Trail to
Regro»al Santiago Oaks Regional Park�In addition;the provided o en 5pace can become a verp scenic .
Recrea6onalTtails element of the Greenway:For these reasons we support: s project.We take no posit�on on the
Advisory Commitfee ��y concerns regarduig the housing elements of the.pro�ect. However there are other concerns;:
Marrlyn 1►�loore, �at we would like to coniment on.They aze:trail cqnnectivity,si:te remediation and si#e care.arid'
;,:rr�esurer,oc maintenance. -
`::Friarrds:of Music
` ` Trail Connectivi ..and Circulation. The proposed trail plan does not include a link to the.
:leanne carter extsh�ng ant�ago ree c Trail luw ch currently ends on the west'side of Cannon Sfreet Without
,
Teacher,'Dlrector�, �s linka�e,ttie pro osed trail system will not provide its valuable addition to the Santtago .
`El Malena Nature - , :
center Creek Tratl It will e merely an amenity to the proposed housin�pioJect.It is essenttal that one
af the:proposed:trails connect to the existing S.ant�ago;Creek.Trail.west.of;Cannon and to:the
'W Michast Short existi.ng Mabuxy Ranch Trail on the east side of the project srte.
;';OIr�.Cbr,orange
'courrty Msster Site Remediation. We saw little in the EIR describing any remediation steps the property owner
' .cnorare. is committing to take with respect to the creek and suirounding open space, VVe would l�lce;the
City to malee sure that the site is cleaned up and put back to a natural state(free of hazardous
. minuig debris and waste) as part of any approval o�this project.
„
Care and Maintenan.ce: We would love to see;this section of Santiago Creek iumed:into an
;
extension o autiago Oaks Regianal Park,or ather similar park,cared for and maintained by�C
Pazks as part of fhe regionalpazk system in the area. This will assure the trees and plants will:be
maintained,the hails cared for,and the creek properly managed iu perpetuity. In order to.have a
long-iasting greenway and public enjoyment of the srte,we believe a pernianent steward sucli"as
OC Pazks is necessary.
. Smcerely: f��`
>
`
.... .. �: - �
��" �
. _
,.; ... Moore Pamela Galera
President,SCGA Vice Presidenf SCGA
ttac ment
'20R Spectrum Center Or. � . . • . • • � .
'Suite 1250 . � . ,' �
Irv.ine,CA92618 ; . � . . . �. �
(999)477-2090 TEL . ' , . . .
:(9;�9}936-4823 FAX . . . .
•frank�elfend.com � . � � • . . . . . .
, ::�.:•.;•;� . . • ,
';;.t � :Mareh 15,2029 . . �� . . � � . . � . , . �
t:: � . � . .. .
' .,.....:. . .. ..i;..,<,;,;�;::. ... . " . � . . � � �
• :.� ,, � �: . � :�.Mr.�D;onald Bradle ` , � ' � �
:��8��1:�':F�:B:\:!� : . , . y . .
;and.Associates,:lnc. . president,�range,Park Association � � � �
���.Franklyn A..Elfend •• �P.O,Box 2293 - � � � � � �
>President :. . . . . .
. . � � :�range,CA 92859 . � : � :. . � .
� . � . � � . , . � . � � � . Via Email and U.S.MaFI . �
� . . �Subject: Resolution No. 10081 . � � . . � � �
` �:.: Dear Mr. Bradley: . : , � . � � � . . . . .
� � � . �� In accordance.with Resolution No.10U81,this letter shall serrre as Forma�1Vatice nn the Trails . . .
, � � � � . � �at 5antiago.Creek project..Aii related documentation,�including the Recirculated Draft � �
�', . . . : ' Envir.onmental Irrtpact Report and,5pecific Plan were provided to OPA on November 26, : . :
� � � � � . 2018..The Development:Agreement was subsequentty,�provided to you on.becember.7, �
�� � � .'2q18 �Also,as you ar.e aware,we have been meeting�with OPA�representatives oti this ; � � � � � �
' . ' � �:..� proposal since March 2015,�and have provided project.information and.documentat'ion,for..• . � �
, . . •� : .-the OPA Bo�rd's reyiew and considerat�on. � : �. � � � �
�. � . . : �. .:�. : • . . . . � . . . . . , .. ; . .: . .
� � � �� � `�We..have.attempted.to schedule meetings with.you on several occasions uver the last several
� � � � �months#o discuss the.RDEIR,Specifc Plan,�Devetapment Plan.and OPA Plan Consistency. `.:. , - �
� � :.� �� : . ` :NQt�only have these meetmgs been rejected,but yau also indicated that.you were prohibited . �: . �
.: � . � � .fram�r.efiurning an.y of rriy phone calls..Notwithstanding the,forgoing,we arQ ready,wiliing , .
� � � �and able to ��� � ��� ith you. nd the Board,atthe earliest pos5ible opportunity., , ,� . : � . .� ,
. : . . � � . 'Ve yYaur� ' : � . � . . . . .
. ;,. � :.. . , . . . Franklyn R.Elfend . �.� .�� � � � . . � �. : . . : .
� � � � . �.'President �. . . : . � . . ". .
�. � . ; � � `FRE:pf � .. � " . . �� . . � � . � .� �� . � . . � � � . .
. . . . . ! .Cc: .Carmen A Morinetlo,Esq. �: . . . . . . . .� :� : . . . .
� �. � .Mike H.Zischke,Esq. � � .. � : . : � . , . . � .
� . '. : � � " � � , .�GarySheatz,Orange City Attorrley. . .. . : . . . .
� � � . .Rick Otto,Ocange City Manager � � .. ; " � .
� �. � . . � Richard Garcia,City of Orange Senior Planner � . . � � ; .
tt a c
ment
: E
��`
.. �..::�� ..
^ .
k
�.'€
Or�n�e P�rk Assaciation
FO Box 2293 Orange,CA 928'59
Apri119,20I9
Via Email ta Fvcrouch�citv�foran�e.cam
William Crouch, Gomm.uriity Development Director
Giiy of Orange
Communiiy Development Department,Planninb Division
3:00 E. Cliaprnan Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
RE: Trails at Santiago Creek/Reeireulated Draft Environment Impact Report
Recommendation Of OPA Advisory Committee
Dear Mr. Croueh:
This xesponds to your email of April 17, 2019,requesting additional inforrriation
regarding th�Orange Parl�Acres Advisory Committee°s("UPAC")recommendations for thxs
project.
The only issue the OP�G vated publicly on at the Apri18, 20191�earing was a straight
line"Approve or. Reject"rec.oinxrc�udation. Addifixonal issues w�re deliberated upon publicly by
the QPAC rnembexs�which should respond ta your specific questions. These issues included the
following:
The reasons for the recommendation ta reject fihe prajeet include:
(1) the site is not consistent wiih the OPA Specific Plasi(based on current and future
land use). The OPA Specific Plan ctirrently calls for open space on the area
proposed for homes;
(2) Yhe awner l�as not cornplied with SMARA requirements;
(3) contaminants exist on tlie site;
(4) additional traffie during and after.projeet buildout;
(5) diff culty evacaating residents in ease ofi flood or fire;
'V�illiam Crouch
Apri119, 20.19
1'age 2
(b) proxirnity to the landfill area;
(7) fihe biologieal analysis in th�RI3EIR is aut of date;
(8) the project provides no reclamafion plan for restoriiig Santiago Creck.
�11so, as previously mentianed,the applicant has not yet resp�nded to the public
c�mments submitted in r�sp�nse to the RDEIR. The OPAC is particularly interesteci in the
applicant's response to OPA's public co.mment letter, sent on December 28,2018,by Shute,
1Vlihaly&Weinherger,on belialf e,f OPA.
Finally,while there have been a numbex af ineetings amc�ng the�p�licant,the:QPA
Board,the OPA members�f the city's Liaison Comrnitiee,anel individual OPA Board and Real
Esfiate Committee rnembers,lzo meetings took place between the date the applicant sen�its
1VTarch 1S;20191etter tri��ering the OPAC Iiearing process and the hearing itself The only
meeting the tOFAC has lield regarding tiiis projeet was fhe April 8 hearulg. As previously noted,
the applicant did not appear at this hearing.
I hope this assists the eity in its analysis. If you have any further qnestions,please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
���� ��
onald E.Sradley
Cliair, Orange Park Acres Aclvisory Cornmittee
cc: Robcrt Gareia,via email--x�tiarcia,�r�citvoforange.corn
Rick.Otto,via email�—�rotto,�)citvoforail e.�, com
1155203.1
�
ttac ment
_ . _ _
_ __..
`R�OQ QILt�p� �, �
� , .�� Clt tJ� Vl�:�� Pa�'�
: � /:7855 Si�lrtrcrsu;Borilcrcrrrl;.Villn f'crx�, Culifor�tic��286/w4lb�t. �4'1431V:i��1lnn�r���r�; "
; , ,
(714);y98-1500 Fit�r: (71�)�y8-1508 ,
' '; ' ,..:. : . ' _
_ _ . . _. _
_ . ... .. _. _._ _ _ _ ..
_ .. .._. . . _...
, ,
_ J�,y z,zai;9 ,
, _
,
Honorable Mark A, Murphy,Mayor : -
_ _ ,. .
City of�range; ,
_
_
,
3U0 E Ghapman Ayenue _
Urange,:CA 9286G -
, _ _
, ,
SUBJEET 'TRAIi;S'AT.SANTIAGO'CREEK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Mayor Murphy, , ,
,
, _
As you ar$aware, the;Ctty of:;Vtlla:ParI.raised c.oncerns;regatding varivus impacts the proposed Tra�ls;at
Santiugo.:Creek:developrnent prvjeet;may have on the City of Vipa Rark. The City ident:ifed:our.concerns.,::
; Y
and submittetl comments to both the initial DEIR.and RDEIR,which I am sure our staff:have on file.
,; _
;5ubsequently,:the Developer:reaehed out ta the Gity of Villa Park in an effort.to.determine.measures;that
may b.e iinplemented:to help.:mit�gate the idenhfied impacts foc the C�ty.of Viila Park, In,_working wtth:;the
De�eloper's Agant, the attaehed Proposed.':Conditions of Appcoval for the;:pro�ect :were drafted for
cons�det�tion. After carePul deliberation,we bel�eve,th�t the;measures mcoi;pora..ted therein reAsonably heip :
_. _
; mitigate the concerns raised by;'the City o�Villa Park. It is our beliefthut'the nine(9).proposed cond�tions„..
' are.muCually agreeabte to both parties, and'.as s�ch we would tespectfully request that the Oran$e.City ,
Councif:advpt:them as;part of'the ttpprovul of the project.
Should'the project be approved.by the City ofOrunge with the condifions incorporated therem and'assuming -
the project withst�nds:any legal challenges,please be advised that the City of VilIa Park ts.sugpvrtive of
movingiforward witli th�Trails:at Santiago Greek project.
,: ,
; Thank.:you for'your conside.ration:of our request. Please feel free to contact either Steve Franks,the Villa '
,,
Park CityMAnager,or myself should you have.any.guestions or need any additional clarification. '
Sineerely;
,:.
, ,
, ,
,
. . _
�,�,.a.G/;,
_ ,
Vince Rosssn�,Mayor.' ' , .
_: _..
Attachment The Trails,at Santiago Greek Proposed Conditions of Approval
` cc: - ,Mem6ers,Wit1a Park.City Gouncil.
; ,
_ .
,,
, Members, Orange City Gouncil
' ' ; ' Rick Otto, Orange:City:IVlanager
, ,., _
' ;$teve Franks;Vi11a Park City'1vlanager
' _ ;, : VIN . . y°ur•Rn[3f31E 1'17`I`S.Mu�'or 1'ra Tc,rn
_ CE ROSSINI.Nf:►
Rt)BFRT CnLLACQ'[T;Gs►uncilman•CRYSTAI,i�91LC:S,C��unr'sl�vc�man•CHA17 7lMhiiriZl�4AN,:Ccwncilii�an
The Trails at Santiago Creek
- ' ' Proposed Conditians of Appraval
„ _
_
-
1. Traffic cantrol for any street ciosure,detour,�r other disruption to-traffic cicculation. _
, , ,
_
2. Identify:the routes that canstructian vehicles wiQ utilize for the delivery af constructiqn:materials -
to access the site,-traffic controls and detaurs, and;proposed ¢onstr.uction phasmg;plan far:the -
project: Atargeted average af75%of trnck:traffic related to hauting construction materialsand
,
; the s4ils remediation;'basetl'upon fhe current proj�ct estimates in the;RDEIR;will be prahibitetl
,
,, , . _ ,
' f�om travelling>westbo:und on 5antiago Canyon Rqad/Villa Pack Road through the Gty of:Villa Parlc : ':
ant!Cify;of Qrange� At no time will fihe auerage truck;t�affic vary mare;than!1090 a6ove or belaw
, .
the tar et of 75%. The Developer will assist:in monitorin usa e b
_
g g . g. Y praviding the Ccty of Villa Park
;and City of Orange a(og of actual truck hauling traffic an a quarteriy basis. ' ' '
,
' ' 3 Cooperate with the City af!Vi[Ia Pack related to monitoring and repair of construction related wear
' and tear on Santiaga:Cenyon Road/Villa Park Road caused'6y any direct damage resulting from,
`' the Projects:construttion activity.
' ; 4. .Requice;the Applicant to kee:p a11 haul routes clean and feee of d�bris,ineluding;but ndt limited:to
gravel and dirtas a resuit ofi its operations. The Applicant shall clean:adjacent streets;as directetl
,:
tiiy the City Engineer{ar representative of the City Eng(neer�,of any material which may h�ve been
' spilled,;tracked,or blown onto adjacent streets or areas.
,: 5 Oversized vehicles :hauling 'or fransporting material .related to, :construction and/or soils '
,..
_ , _ .:
- remediation will be allowed 6etween the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:00:QM only;:Manday thraugh , ;; .
,
,
;
- !Friday,unless'approvetl otheirwise 6y the City Engineer. tVa hauling or transport wiI{be allowed
- dunng nJghttime%arly morning hou�s,weekends;;or Federal holidays::
_
' 6 Use of;local residential streets within tiie surrauntiing neighborhoods shall be,prahibited ':
, ,
7. All construction-related parking and staging of vehicle5 will:6e kept out af the.adjacent public
, roadways and wlll occur an-site. .
,. ,: , ,
,
' ; ; 8 Providing a crossing.'guard at the intersection of Villa: Park Road and Cen#er Drive during
;:.
;constructian peciods during the schoal year. - .
,,.: ,
,
, _. ; :: ,
9. Contributing`$ZS,OOO toward the reconditioning.praject for the greenbelt atljacent ta Wantla
_
,:�riVe and Vi11a Pa�k Road priqr ta issuance:af the Grading Permit for the'Pro�ect.
tt c ment
a
Staff is forwarding correspondence received from interested parties in support or
opposition to the proposed Trails at Santiago Creek Project after 5:30 PM on August 5,
2019 through September 18, 2019.
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Monday,August 5, 2019 9:17 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Unabbreviated Speech given tonight to the Planning Commission
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
The following is transcript of the full unabbreviated speech I wanted to finish tonight at the Planning
Commission Meeting in support of the Trails at Santiago Creek Project proposed:
Good evening! My name is Mark Moore and I have been a resident of the City for the last 35 years and lived
directly adjacent to the gravel pit on the Sully Miller property for the last 22 years. I axn a HOA Board member
of The Reserve.
This proposal without question will do THE MOST GOOD FOR THE MOST PEOPLE in The City of Orange.
Approval of The Trails project would have the net effect of removing a major health and noise issue from the
community while creating 120 acres in new open space and trails. Nearly every community located nearest the
site endorses this plan.
• The Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance supports this plan.
• The HOA board of Maybury Ranch supports this plan.
• The HOA board of The,Reserve unanimously supports this plan.
• The City of Villa Park supports this plan.
• The Santiago Greenways and Open Space Alliance (which is composed of inembers of the community
surrounding the gravel pit site) supports this plan.
• Former president of the OPA Association itself, Tom Davidson, supports this plan.
These endorsements are from parties with no direct financial interest in this project and amount to thousands of
concerned citizens that all cannot, or chose not,be here tonight- so I am speaking for them.
The only opposition to this project are the same people that on at least THREE occasions in the last 15 years
have actually supported various plans for the development of this very same site that they now claim is
"dangerous"—usually in exchange for land and/or cash to do so.
The truth is that these Opponents of Rezoning have no real credibility in their opposition to the project and no
real commitment to ANYTHING other than what they can get out of any project for themselves. I fear that is
again the case now.
1
•In May 2003 Fieldstone Homes signed a contract with the Orange Park Acres equestrian community to
"boost"their project. OPA received an equestrian arena(now the Brandman Arena) and$500,000 for
promoting Fieldstone's plan at every opportunity.
• The same people were also in full support of building on this land six years later in 2009 when they demanded
JMI give them$5 million and the deed to the Brandman arena site to secure an OPA endorsement for the JMI
development proposal.
• Most recently,the same group was again in total support of building on this property just last August when
they proposed The Sears Adams Plan to the landowner and to the City as you recall—a project proposal that
included 47 homes on the property along with a demand for all $8 million in cash that was proposed in the
current 128 home plan under review tonight.
When the Sears Adams Plan was deemed by the landowner to be financially unfeasible, these people essentially
blackmailed the landowner by withdrawing their plan and reversing their position. Thus was born the "Keep
Orange Safe"movement this Spring. The facts show that these people are total charlatans and they have no real
concerns with regard to the safety of anything except their own pocketbooks.
At best,these people are total hypocrites and at worst,they are engaging in political extortion. Either way, it is
clear that-based on past history-they will support anv plan that pays them what they want and oppose anX
plan that does not.
These individuals have collectively bullied, intimidated, and attacked a11 those that might have another
viewpoint on this issue, creating an environment where the voices of the majority that are in favor of this
proposal are muffled or suppressed in the process.
Those of us who live nearest this site and are most affected by this decision, feel we have been silenced for far
too long on this issue. A small vocal minority of residents in OPA has dictated to us how they will allow us to
live for the last two decades. No more!
Five years after this plan is approved and the Ridgeline property has a new$2 million riding arena along side of
a myriad of new recreational facilities there,these very same people will no doubt be walking,riding, or biking
the through the miles of new trails that this project created.
I am certain their children and grandchildren will be playing in the 120 acres of new greenways and parks that
will result with approval of this proposal that will transform what was a fenced in gravel pit and an abandoned
golf course into something useful and beautiful for everyone in the City of Orange.
I would wager that nearly all of these folks at that time would appreciate the decision you made here tonight to
recommend this project for approval and wonder why they ever opposed it.
This is actually a very easy decision here if you look at it objectively. It's not even close. Let's stop kicking this
ugly, noisy,toxic"Can"down the road for another 20 years.
Let's put an end to all this foolishness tonight and make Orange a better place in the process. To be very honest,
looking at the benefits to the residents of this community, it is amazing to me personally that we are even here
tonight debating this project.
Approving this project closes the gravel pit that has been a nuisance to OPA for decades while creating 120
acres in new open space,trails, greenways, and parks. This plan makes the City a better and healthier place to
2
live. Opportunities like this do not come along everyday. The vast majority of those living in Orange and all of
us who are sensible and reasonable do not want to see it squandered.
I urge you to recommend approval of this plan.
Thank you for your time.
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
���...
�
;�;
�SE_P,�
3
Robert Garcia
From: hilarie moore <hilariemoore7@me.com>
Sent: Wednesday,August 7, 2019 12:05 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting
Hello Robert,
Here's a copy of my speech from Monday night's meeting.. (I didn't get to read it)
Greetings,
My name is Hilarie Moore, and I have been a resident of Orange Park Acres since 1914. We
rolled into town in our model T,through the orange groves,past the general store, and settled
into our beautiful rural lifestyle. People say to me, "My goodness! You don't look a day over
102!"
The point I'm making is, we'd all like things to sta.y the same.. like it was, back in"The good old
days," but change and growth is an inevitable part of life here in Orange County.
Since we can't freeze time, we have to work together to make our current situation as positive as
possible for ALL the residents of this fair city. Pitting neighbor against neighbor is not only
hurtful, it's counterproductive to what most of us are trying to achieve - a lifestyle that benefits
everyone.
I think we can all agree on three key points:
1. A sand and gravel/quarry/mining operation does not belong in a residential setting.
Period.
The dust,noise,truck traffic, unhealthful pollutants,and terrible eyesore affects all of us.
2. We need open space and parks. We need trails for horses,hikers, and mountain bikers to
enjoy.
3. Thoughtfully planned homes are a way to achieve profit for the builder, and also enhance the
beauty of our community.
How many homes?That's been a major sticking point, but rather than blindly rejecting any and
all proposals, a compromise can surely be reached.
If neighbors would work together, with rational, respectful, and intelligent discourse, instead of
emotional knee jerk bullying,positive progress would be made. People from both"sides" of this
issue have been guilty of behaving badly. It's time to grow up.
The general tone of our country is one of dividedness, and hatred.
That's not my America.
i
It's time for ALL of us to take the high road, roll up our sleeves, and work together to solve this
issue. Reach out to each other, work together, and support our beautiful rural commuity-don't
continue to tear it apart. '
We're better than that.
Thank you.
Hilarie Moore
Hilarie Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange park Acres,CA
92869
cell 714-366-5298
2
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Friday,August 9, 2019 12:56 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: The Foothills Sentry Propaganda Machine
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
I wanted to share a letter to the Editor of THE FOOTHILLS SENTRY that they refused to publish. This
is happening more and more lately. Any letters sent to them in SUPPORT of the project are either
severely edited or not published at all. Patrick Wheelock of Maybury Ranch submitted a letter that
appears in the August issue, but the edited it without his knowledge to suit their"Anti-Development"
agenda - not matter the benfits to the community. This has happended numberous times in the past
year-to many to count! xcuses are made by Tina Richards that these edits were made to either
"save space" or they were "factually incorrect" in her opinion.
In case you are under the impression that this publication is a "newspaper", you should put that
concept aside. THE SENTRY is the state propaganda machine for the Opponents of Rezoning and
their agenda. Make no mistake that THE FOOTHILLS SENTRY is not being either unbiased or
objective in what they publish.
This was the letter I submitted to them they would not publish in the current issue that that reason, for
obvious reasons:
The new proposal they now oppose has MORE Parks and open space, MORE cash included to fhe
City, and FEWER HOMES than the proposal they strongly favored in 2003. That proposa195 years
ago provided for only 6 acres of parks, no cash contribution from the developer, and included over
180 homes at that time. There were no concerns whatsoever at that fime about the safety of the site.
The truth is that these Opponents of Rezoning have no real commitment to ANYTHING other than
what they can get out of any project. They were in full supporf when they proposed a plan 11 months
ago - The Sears Adams Plan - to build 47 homes on the property if they all got all the money and
open space proposed in the current plan for 128 homes, but when that offer was refused, they
essentially held fhe landowner hostage by withdrawing their plan in the Spring and reversing their
position. They were also in full support nearly ten years ago when the same landowner(JMl) gave
them $5 million to purchase that support (this was discovered last year and documented in The
Foothills Sentry via a rebuttal from OPA admitting the Board "made an honest misfake"in doing so).
The bottom line is, based on past history, that these people are total charlatans and fhey have no real
concerns of the safety of anything but fheir own pockefbooks. It certainly appears that they only have
their own interests at heart and care nothing for the residents around them or what is besf for fhe City
and their community. At best, these people are total hypocrites and at worst, they are engaging in
political extortion and are morally corrupt. Either way, it is clear that- based on past history- they will
support and plan that pays them what they want and oppose any plan that does not.
i
�L�
�SEP;
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
�
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
iLi
�SE_P,'
2
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Monday,August 12, 2019 9:53 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Two decades of failed plans and continued rock crushing and noise is enough...
Importance: Migh
Dear Robert,
It is clear from my meetings with the Boards of the Communities adjacent to the Sully Miller property
that the vast majority of residents actually surrounding this land support this plan as it would
permanently remove the gravel pit from our community that has impacted our health and well-being
for the last 21 years and does not include homes north of Santiago Creek which would only add to the
area traffic issues—which are critical issues to us all that live closest to the site. We want to see the
community gain over 120 acres in new parks and open space and the $8 million being offered to
landscape and develop that land.
On the other hand, those from OPA that oppose the project and rezoning actually live miles away
from this eyesore. In essence, they actually support the landowners right to develop the area north of
the creek with residential housing and the continued use of the sand and gravel operation as
permitted by the S&G zoning code. Conversely, their plan does not include the preservation of
Santiago Creek Greenway, open space, funding for trails or the dedication of Ridgeline. This is truly
an incredible position for them to take given their claims of wnating what is best for their community.
They base this opposition primarily upon the premise that the OPA Specific Plan —drafted nearly 50
years ago in 1971 — expresses a preference for one acre lots within their sphere of influence (which is
the area just 25% of the Sully Miller Property closest to The Reserve) and cannot be amended —
which is not the case. The OPA Specific Plan they reference was last amended most recently in 1991
for the eight half-acre homes — ironically— right here in The Reserve. This entire argument is flawed.
If this land is not rezoned from Sand & Gravel - which is what OPA now apparently wants - Sand &
Gravel is all it can ever be. Those are the facts.
Maybe the Residents of Orange Park Acres should pool their money and buy the property
from those "greedy" developers instead of trying to steal it through the political process -
which is clearly their intention. Then they can enjoy the benefits of land ownership— paying
for upkeep, taxes and insurance on vacant land.
Please APPROVE the Trails at Santiago Creek and let's put an end to all this foolishness. Two
decades of failed plans and continued rock crushing and noise is more than enough.
�L'
�SEP;
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
1
Robert Garcia
From: Jennifer Scudellari
Sent: Tuesday,August 13, 2019 9:24 AM
To: Robert Garcia;Anna Pehoushek
Cc: Kim Kinsler
Subject: FW:Trails at Santiago
-----Original Message-----
From:Angel Anderson<angelanderson@socal.rr.com>
Sent:Sunday,August 11,2019 5:43 PM
To: Kim Kinsler<kkinsler@cityoforange.org>;Jennifer Scudellari<jscudellari@cityoforange.org>
Subject:Trails at Santiago
Board,
Are you crazy approving this project?!!!
Have you not driven on Santiago at 5:00 pm? Ever? Have you not heard from numerous citizens against this project?
Have you learned of a means to pay for the upkeep of the proposed open space that the rest of us have not heard
about? This city has certainly been affected by traffic since the opening of Serrano to Weir Canyon and now you have
added to this on going situation instead of working on alleviating the problem!
It's truly sad that you do not care about how bad the situation is.
Angel Anderson
Mabury Ranch Resident
Sent from my iPhone
1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Saturday,August 17,2019 8:39 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: OPA Disrespects Us All!
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
Recently the opponents of rezonoing for THE TRAILS AT SANTIAGO CREEK have taken to calling
the OC Register and their coverage of the issue "Fake News".
The only "Fake News" I can find evidence of,however, is that OPA and their agents pass off as journalism in
THE FOOTHILLS SENTRY. The entire publication is a total biased distortion of the fact written by the
KeepOrangeSafe reactionaries. Anyone who writes in with an opposing opinion has their content edited,
omitted, or(in the case of online forums) "removed" by them. The KeepOrangeSafe website does not even
allow COMMENTS on their webpage for fear of being called down on all their alternative facts. All they do on
their site and in The Sentry is trade in FEAR MONGERING and CONSPIRACY THEORIES.
The only defense these people have to support their opposition of The Trails plan is to try to scare everyone
with threats of fire, flood, earthquake, and the apocalypse if the proposal is approved and cast doubt on the
integrity of everyone involved in the process(the Planning Commission, The Mayor, The City Council, and
every individual that supports this project). It's disgraceful. It's all a load of horse s**t- and they would know.
Say whatever you like on the websites of the supporters of The Trails Project, everything posted is backed up
with information and statements from reliable sources. The deal is a good one -they don't have to slant the facts
and lie.
I hope everyone at the City Council will listen to the facts in this matter and filter out all the noise being
generated by the Opponent of this proposal. Those of us cloest to the gravel pit site that support this project are
all tired of their bullying and arrogance for the last twenty years. Their attidtude and behaviour towards the rest
of us in Orange Park Acres is shameful. They disrespect us all.
The Truth Will Come Out.
TL�
�SE_P,'
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
1
R.M. Rothschild
6019 E. Mabury Ave.
Orange, CA 92687
August 19, 2019
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
Re: The Proposed Trails at Santiago Creek Project
Please see my ten-point letter addressing the general plan amendment, zoning changes
and development requested and proposed by the developer for the subject project that
was sent to the City Planning Commission a couple of months ago. Although the
Commission has recommended project approval, I see little change and find that the
restated DEIR remains vastly inadequate. Therefore, the City Council should deny all
requests for this proposed project.
That said, herein I am emphasizing the point regarding remediation of the former mining
site and current recycling activities. The developer's agent and some City staff have
stated that the site is not subject to requirements of the 1975 SurFace Mining and
Reclamation Act (SMARA). This is not a point of fact, and is a substantially contested
point based upon the City's own records. Contrary to comments made by the
developer's representative, the State Mining and Geology Board has not actually
weighted in on the point. Spokespersons for that agency have merely stated that since
aggregates have been depleted the proposed development is out of it jurisdiction.
I urge members of the Council to consider that this contested point is of no matter.
There are reasons for the Act's passage in 1975; very clear public health reasons.
Public health and safety needs to be considered no matter whether or not mining
activities ceased prior to, or continued beyond a certain date. Public health is a concern
today either way. Construction site employees will be exposed to substances unknown
for a period of at least finro years and potentially up to 15 years. Residents of
neighboring communities will likewise be exposed to unknown hazards for extended
periods of time. And obviously, new residents of the 128 to 240 homes face the
prospects of health problems unknown and unmitigated.
The City Council should require a detailed geological analysis of materials on site and a
remediation plan for all contaminants and hazardous materials before any rezoning is
enacted or development permitted.
Forget the legal timeline. Remember public health and safety. It's the right thing to do.
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Tuesday,August 20, 2019 12:57 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: [BULK] Opponents of Rezoning Represent a Very Small Part of The City on The Whole
Importance: Low
Dear Robert,
The people of Orange Parks Acres do not represent the best interests of the community on the whole. History
shows that they are repeatedly fought and blocked numerous proposals to improve the community regardless of
the cost or benefits to the rest of us. They are doing this again now on the proposal for The Trails At Santiago
Creek,which they now oppose. The rest of us want to see the community gain over 120 acres in new parks and
open space and the $8 million being offered to landscape and develop that land. They now want to keep it a
gravel pit.
These are the same people that blocked the installation of a sewage system in their community in favor of
keeping septic tanks to retain the"rural feel" of their community. These are the same people that blocked the
installation or streetlights and sidewalks, for the same reason. These are the same people that blocked at least a
half dozen other plans to get rid of the gravel pit the last 22 years in hopes of finding a source of funds to turn it
into open space,but never seem to do so.
These people have a long track record of bad decisions with regard to what is best for all of us. OPA seemingly
wants to "Make OPA Great Again" and hold the entire community back in the"Good Old Days". That is fine
for them if that is what they choose, but allow the rest of us the opportunity to create parks and recreational
space with a piece of property that currently benefits nobody. As it was stated at the Planning Commission
hearing on August Sth when this project was APPROVED, "Orange is more than just the interests of the
Equestrians in the Area. There has not been a horse on the Sully Miller Property in over 100 years."
Please APPROVE the Trails at Santiago Creek and let's put an end to all this foolishness. Two decades of failed
�--,
plans and continued rock crushing and noise is more than enough bacuase of this backward thinking�SEP;
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Thursday,August 22, 2019 9:21 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: [BULK] Opponents of Rezoning Represent a Very Small Part of The City on The Whole
Importance: Low
Dear Robert,
The people of Orange Parks Acres do not represent the best interests of the community on the whole. History
shows that they are repeatedly fought and blocked numerous proposals to improve the community regardless of
the cost or benefits to the rest of us. They are doing this again now on the proposal for The Trails At Santiago
Creek,which they now oppose. The rest of us want to see the community gain over 120 acres in new parks and
open space and the $8 million being offered to landscape and develop that land. They now want to keep it a
gravel pit.
These are the same people that blocked the installation of a sewage system in their community in favor of
keeping septic tanks to retain the "rural feel"of their community. These are the same people that blocked the
installation or streetlights and sidewalks, for the same reason. These are the same people that blocked at least a
half dozen other plans to get rid of the gravel pit the last 22 years in hopes of fmding a source of funds to turn it
into open space,but never seem to do so.
These people have a long track record of bad decisions with regard to what is best for all of us. OPA seemingly
wants to"Make OPA Great Again" and hold the entire community back in the"Good Old Days". That is fine
for them if that is what they choose, but allow the rest of us the opportunity to create parks and recreational
space with a piece of property that currently benefits nobody. As it was stated at the Planning Commission
hearing on August Sth when this project was APPROVED, "Orange is more than just the interests of the
Equestrians in the Area. There has not been a horse on the Sully Miller Property in over 100 years."
Let's put an end to all this foolishness. Two decades of failed plans and continued rock crushing and noise is
more than enough bacuase of this backward thinking�SEP;Please show your support for The Trails at Santiago
Creek Project and APPROVE THIS PLAN- we want this mess cleaned up for good.
;r;
�SE_P,�
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Saturday,August 24, 2019 1:21 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: [BULK] The Core Zoning Argument Against Rezoning Sully Miller is False
Importance: Low
Dear Robert,
I thought you might find is most interesting that in my research on the County of Orange General Plan
I turned up some very interesting facts.
There is an area in the heart of Orange Park Acres, which is unincorporated. This means those
properties are under the land use jurisdiction of the County of Orange, not the City of Orange.
The County of Orange General Plan, which is the land use constitution for this unincorporated area,
designates these properties as "Suburban Residential"which allows between .5 and 18 dwelling units
per acre. Although the zoning is for 1 acre, these properties could be rezoned for up to 18
dwelling units per acre without a general plan amendment (see the map that shows this I have
attached).
In addition, I could not find any reference or mention in the County of Orange General Plan of the
Orange Park Acres Specific Plan. The City Orange from all the research I have done, apparently only
adopted the Orange Park Acres Specific Plan by Resolution 3915 in 1973.
I could not find the Orange Park Acres Specific Plan referenced anvwhere on the County's website
for the General Plan. I have had two other colleagues review this information and they came up with
the same conclusions.
As this is one of the core arguments against the Trails at Santiago Creek by those opposed to the
project, this would appear to undercut that entire premise.
The entire argument that the General Plan does not allow zoning for homes less than 1 acre is
baseless - as is the contention that the Orange Park Acres Specific Plan has any bearing on this
matter.
Like so much other noise being generated by the Opponents of Rezoning, this entire premise would
appear to be just more misinformation and false arguments on their part.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
i
_...... ..... _......._.............. ............ ... .................. ...._.................. ......................_..... .... _....... .._._.......
_._... ......_..... ._.............. . ..... ........ ..._....... . . __... _........ . .. ......._....... ....... ........... ..._..
_....... . ............ ._............................._.. . .... ...... ... ..._..._..: . __.... ......... ..... .._......._.. __ ..._......._..
_........... ._ ..... .............. ..._......... ...... .... . .... ..........__......... . .__.. ... ................._ ............... . ._................
���� �
r -�:�•:k ��",
;� - ,/°� _
� �,�
�
O': ��s�' ��`��
�
,rn � , `
� '_
� . ct,` ,. ;.
�
�
_ �� _
� ��� : �
'�'�'- S�" . .� �£���g;�� � . �� '¢��`�f#. �;7���a� ����� `"�' . �..
��. �. � � ��€�#�� . ��: �� �'��� , �� . � �
� �L 9 i A� ���r� r a�`,���`.�� � .�
s
C) !��#���- , ��� ��,�'� ,'����s� � 3� e.
�"� !Lf � ���g��s� Ira���,a �. �,-� � ''�v§ � �{ 1d�.
43. � i : �9F��-[4 �'�����,��y -,a��3�,�� : q;�, � �r.�.
. . � 5 S ��{. �^ u . y a�� � � : 4 .
���; � �+q� . �3�a��7�"� - �� , �'�`i���'7��- �. �,?,.�,�.�,��. k i r � '���n '� " �
�-, �- •3�. ������j. . ��� � �*3 E.'�> � ,�, �"'r,�#f� '.. d'x € h �y'� s� .
Y
,� .y,,.� �.-..- ��y� ..�� ✓��y� j_ � .'..���y: `' � '�i,• "�� �`:.. .
� . � � ''��x:..i�� � � : i / S ��:,.. '4.«���� k�.:,,
- 4{�!1 2 5' _ 3 q 4 - t "�
. . . �_. � . ��,,.'y�,����+3sS + � � '�, A ��ti z'x,.4�is`� : b� -� p f
' �' r "�I r :� w - � Mt a ` n
�, �. g �? �. ,,�� a� a�s �i�� '` d!_ :� �.;a.,," �# :xy ,,�'° _ ,�
- �r A� s � �..� � :.w ATay, ..�z.�`.� -� s � �l� `�' �
t� �t�./ a� 3 '�' _�� � u., �r° ,�� '^ m
�< �� '�./'�,.,r'p' '� a
'�' ; S ,�§ N�.,.�r � r� E y �.� '���4 � A� '�f��k l
e`��s� � �s'r'S't *' ; u } ' � � � �
. � �, # . �" i��ti'-� �� �,k
_ �'��. �.J�� � ✓`t� �� S �5�������. z� ���'t �-� ��� � �;�����{
�� ��s � t �'
-a�; � � ,�„ �� ;f �
_ �'. r�°'�a'�'�F�,g �k�l;w� ��"a,y�$AT p 3 ;! � �.x �� :�
� d
�� � )�^' �
y���� ���$i4����,�„�: j s .;� ts' "a�y S�� �i` � 3 '4�, �� , �f .
F��
� ` - � t. � � ��,�"�„�.� . �.l" 'Q� � �� �, g"�,s`i.��'�.��.„�,s 1`
¢ � 3; w�.�.� .s� 3' � s f . $
,� ' � � . �,,A R �, >-,�"'P��..s'� g..
g����' t ��� �"��Y e `1.\�� �, ��, ��{�}}�� +�.tg�,g , �����5
�� � a ��d'. *. L� r a. ���, � f t s �"� � 2
E I �^
�� �- s��*> �.� � ��; � � �{r� ��,� s�
�, � ��;,,�� �j e� � ��_ - �d �t��; 1 ��� . � �
; � � f t a'�,.�� ��...,r � ' .
� � � � s
`y S �t+� � �� � ;,�. q, . , � a x
� �
:�� � � � ) � :- � � t .: � � 7� k � �a`;, x� .,,y � ; `�
� 4 ¢ s r
�'�i, �� „��,i;� .,��c. � � � #;', ����"`� `^»�, �: '� �
a S
`^• � x� �� i�S "
�; � .�� �3 � � ��5��,� .,,;,� {
i�r'� � � � #:� 1 ��^� i i �i:' 3 S a '� .:k�. ( . �(�i�, �
� � [ � � . ��,t �r �� �-� ��� c,� S� a t � a �� ��1�� `tr z "���
.j � €'''7 1 �� `� . � 5 Z �� t } '+
.: �� r n,. �t �_��
�.��_ ��,,, .g, � _�� � �� g,���� �� � , `
�� X�,.��'�� s tl E� yrs�` S� �� � R�� ��'...��� .:�i Y i:'^ � r��3 �x�����
� �, �:�>� � ��:� � ;_ � ��R�� ��,., ��¢�� ��,�.
� ��,�� {{:� , ��: � � � ��� �l�i�
���a. ' � c� 1 . g �a� �+� � �' � �� �� �
�� ,a i : : r r��. �c >�'r'„�� � � � #g� � � ��6���31��
�:.� � i��-� �s°: �t � � _µ r s �,�� � �� �,`��I��g v��t{J,��
��,..'
�x,_ � � , �} ��� �. �, i�� ��� �d�`����� � i�`�[!�
; � ''� � ' i � � � 1;, � � 3 � �� ��� r�
;:
[t 7�,� � a e3
. � �q, �� � �
,�I� � .� �� � �
,. _
_> � � � .� � '���
, �
,
_ ___ w.r,.�,�� . .a_ _. . x
� �
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Sunday,August 25, 2019 3:59 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: The Trails at Santiago Creek Plan
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
Contrary to what Oppnents of Rezoning ow say, The Trails at Santiago Creek not only conforms with
the OPA Specific Plan, recent land use studies show that the project makes the best use of the site
possible for the community.
Cluster Housing refers to a development in which homes are situated in groupings relatively close
together, while larger areas of open space within the development form a buffer with adjacent land
uses. Often this is accomplished through smaller individual lots, with the remainder of the land
becoming common ground.
The Trails at Santiago Creek project proposes 128 homes on 109 acres on the Sully Miller property,
but clusters these homes on 40 acres so that 68 acres of that land can be open space for the public—
and that does not include the additional 50 acres of open space proposed to be dedicated to the City
at the Ridgeline site thast is also proposed in the plan.
We are all somewhat familiar with this arrangement, if we think of a typical mountain village,
illustrated here, or a village green forming a common grazing area for livestock. So it is not a new
concept, and is even familiar in OPA. Quoting from the Orange Park Associations own letter
endorsing another such development dated May 28th 2003 in support of 189 homes on this very site
(attached), "There are developments like this in the City of Orange that a/so lie within Orange Park
Acres that have less than one acre minimums Broadmoor, Pheasant Run and fhe Wildemess are fine
examples of this existing lifestyle".
We see three primary benefits of this development pattern:
1. The contiguous open spaces are good practice either for conservation and wildlife habitat, open
space, preserves natural features, provides for equestrian activity, provides best visual image, and
promotes an increase in land values.
2. Grouping homes together reduces the initial investment in roads, streets, and utility lines, as well
as the public sector's maintenance and replacement costs.
3. Relatively close proximity to neighbors means that one is more likely to get acquainted with
neighbors and develop a sense of caring community.
It has been shown that it is far better for the community to have 100 homes on 50 acres with 50 acres
open for the common use of all than 100 homes on 100 one-acre plots where now all the land is
behind fences on private property.
i
Not only is cluster housing clearly allowed under the Orange Park Acres Specific Plan (page 94), it
has shown to be the best and most desirable option available to develop land based on the findings
of all the recent land use studies available.
The Trails at Santiago Creek asm proposed does the most god for the most people in the City of
Orange.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
z
.:. _ __ . . ' - . .- �$�iR�}�°�" $4P�'�ri��.��h�,-��...
� ��� � a
��� �,v
� � ..-
. ...,..,�+� ,�� —
OFt��#G�p1�RK�,4�SOC1,4TitJN
_
P:C�.��1C��93
4�t�'�1�11ts�,�A�2�59
�ny is,zat��
iv1r.Ben t?x�iett,G€x�irnaan.
�r`ty af�li�azt��l�tai�ni�t��om��issic�r� `�'� r>
. 3U0 E.Chapnlan Avc. �� �=� �;
t)ran�c, CA !�23GCs �_a, 3.";
�.� �.�
�� �.,.a�
�,�
ite:Pieictstan�.Dcv.cica}senenU Strity h�#iiler P�ojrcr �� µ-�>��
r.a� .>
�
l��r t�f'r.�ructt�nr��anartiblfl:�omn�i,�sion�rs. , _
t��n w�•iiing il�is.le.tter ott:tieh�tfoi tlie Ur��z�;e Fnrk�isaocitttian�ia.�rd af nirectai•s.We
•Fvotild like io stuttr as a m�tter oTr�caizJ thac tivC no[be seen ns"sel]it��aut"tn th�
Intere,st�a�it de�*�(ap�r.V;��'f�ct thae��vert eha tim�s,v�ara n�w in n,�re�t�nuana,t of •�
draling n�usE go r�n to bi`it�any prajeGt to fzuiGon.Wc sspplAad what lhe Plaaning
�axt�niissian has ne�atiatcs{For ihts co�munity:in_this�araject�aad woulti(ifc�the
Planning Ccjn7inissiorrs rppport:£or�vtSat tivuf�:�1 is afvttal impartanc�l0 0r�n�e Parlc '
Acres and ihesurroundzag oon��siu��ity:
VVe con�idcr u projeci svith a Pcw hom�s tharcould enjay vur iur,it lifcstyle za bc less
�e���ici�#�o i�r�ng�Aurk A�r�.ti��n a�evelapi�Yellt widt�ommon i�rea stn�I�s tiz�t
brizi�s tfte cqu�striun lifcskyle ws nll enjay to n;�reater number o!`residenks.'�licce,ti�c
d��+t�iza��tt��rrts tike tltis'writt�ii�'tTi�City��t`t�ra7ige fttat atsa Ii�itt Ot•a��,�I'fl��i:Acrw�ih;�e
havc less tb�7t`2on��cre minimutna Broadmor,Phefss�ni Run,and"Ch�Wilderness arc
fine;exainpl�s af this��i�tir�g lif�t�te.
Tff�'{JP�nr�nt�a�tti�tie t�ats tf�at surratt�tti otar contmcitiity,that are op�n ta tlte pt�blio
fiee aS'cl�arge;are mar`etairred ttzrough fu»drai'sing and volunce�rrxi�;t�y people that ar�
��mmit��d ta i�tainta[nizag aitr tif�stpl�,'�his is=a l3fesiyle rictt iii ti��history af`1"}t��ity-
of Onngc.
'Y'It�planning pincess hps gone n�i for yi�ite sante timc.Our��osikip:n lias 6ccn tlre su�ne aIl
al�it�;rr��ne�ii tho arenu si[e to m�intttin the�q�estrlatt G�"estyie we tili havc�vorked scr
� ,... ��,.. �.� �
�
ht�rd for�l?��fecl:t�iis ia aa;�Qod proje�t'tha�has,gotten even b�tte�'�actti tlye.Cim�thnt h�a
tieen put int�tl.
'4�'e feet tivc:h.�ve negotia#ed in�ood faith not just far oirrseives;but ai�o for khe good of
� � � �t2t�comm�inity ai darge, �
Ttespcctivelp submitt�d}
Tnm Davidson,ViG�Presidcat
Oran�a PAiIr tlsscaciatiari
_
GCi Mr.I?liiT•�onina,Ms.Msu�i Brandmnn,IVfs:T�r�sa Smitl�,Mr,Ken Romci�o,
tN�yur�4iar1�lYlurf>{�y,�iruricil i�l`�mbeis;Cnrolyr►C�vacohc,7aanpe Gaant�,Ivlike
Alvn�;Steden Amliri�
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Thursday,August 29, 2019 3:13 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: The Trails at Santiago Creek Housing Plan Proposed (Part 2)
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
The Planning Commission has shown it supports the concept of a cluster housing development on
the Sully Miller site, sometimes known as conservation subdivisions, as it may also may be adapted
to suburban or even urban environments where a large undeveloped parcel has been assembled - as
it is proposed now for the Sully Miller site with The Trails at Santiago Creek Project plan.
If a community would like to save as much recreational space or conservation land as possible on
� your undeveloped land, studies show that the best use of the land would be a clusterhousing
development if that is your goal. It is especially preferential when one considers the environmetal
benefits.
From an ecology standpoint, the cluster housing development is preferable to most subdivisions
conceived under traditional zoning and subdivision laws — like individual one acre plots. When a
zoning ordinance requires a minimum lot size, minimum amount of street frontage, maximum lot
coverage limits, and minimum setbacks, this encourages lots of a fairly uniform size, each with its
own individual lawn.
Yet when providing wildlife and bird habitat become high priorities in terms of preserving rural
character or just a desirable degree of contact with nature, grassy individual lawns cannot begin to
compare to native vegetation and contiguous patches of wilderness. Even in semi-rural
developments, where the cluster housing idea is often perceived as most feasible, large-lot
subdivisions, in which each owner manages one to ten acres independently, do not offer as much
environmental benefit as a larger number of contiguous acres of habitat.
In the typical cluster housing development or conservation subdivision, lots are sold individually, with
a homeowners association or a conservancy managing the conservation land as common ground.
This is the proposal with The Trails at Santiago Creek.
i
� ,.: _ �:��..� �-
_ � , "
. -
�
�; �_: ��_ :�
_�7�.
a
�
� _ � L . ,� �.� . �
,..w _. �.
_ �
� .. . ._ � .� �. , ,,
_ �. , ; -, �
��
y� ,: � �
5< _..
. > . •P� v , x , � P
�^^ �! �
....3"- ' . .. :. .. , ,
,.,. r.. .. .. �--
�
�� �
v�; � �'�"i�it��`i ,�� r
.� ��'
�;: �"�� '� � � �� �� ��'�F�1�.�t�ll
_
�,
c� � j� � w � �� �� �
� � � � �' � ��� � �
� �. � � �
�
�� � �
� �� ������� ��"�'�,��, ���°�'�����x�����
��� � � s � � � � �
� ��,, �•� �����:� � ,��" ����t�� �..�� >�..� ? r �°; � s .�' r.3a't
� �
� � s�/I m � �� �� 'y ������.�I f�` Jatl'���� ��.
� Y� ��.�� s ,�r� �`' a.� ;�»§,�pq�+� �
� � � � �a,�,� R � z °�` �� *��$
�'a:. � . � . ,�� " -.,, �y� e,„ ,�..�,� _A. g .^ »�`�,� ��r r: � u
��'� ,� . '��� . : � t`:`�a� �� �* :�
"�„y ^S � �
� � �
7,�;-`�� ��.����. ;�� ���_` *p�` w`,� . � ���rmk �,. ,- '��`.
R *�� fi i�' ;�
;�� "� � , � <�� �' :
, ' ... . \�� y � �� a,��,� _ , Y- . � . P .: �pe^' ' � "
��� � �"� " `� a r� � s� �*�' �� �
��� _ ���� ��� � ����� �S a^ � ��������i��=�=�"�»" `�,.�� � �
� �9�� � ���r' � y a.� � ; _ �, v m.. - � a � r'��.r ik
,'�",n., s n. , t �a �� , ��.w..�»; '"k. v� `� .
a g b � � e
.:� ; �� � � 34 Y -
�Y t}� 5 �#�,
,: �� �ilh �� kk �d'.,�� §�.; $ � � ��. � �yf k _��
�& '� ' '�s� " :;�,� W �� � '�rcr'� �. � '•� �a}�. Cy�, � `��.
� "4 '"# .�, � � ;���#§ � � �,. „ 9 2»�"
� ��-4 - ; � ` � � � � ����w � t+�� " � � sa a„ �� q��,��, .�
e vr .�,� � �. .�3s� y� x , _�s���i � � � �r : ����,,� �.
��x:� rs�� n'r�4`� �� ��� '_� �a9' ��� f '� �u a a . � k �%�
� �� � �,�.� � � � � � ��� � ��'�rw"a �,� � ` �`"a`� ��
� �� ,. �� . � �'� ���� r � � �'� "� �� ��� � � �� � � y � .
��,_ �� � �
� ,,, „ � a� � �� e � _�,,� ��,� �`� � ���r �'�� �,� �� �
.�.a a�. � ��� �� ����rra,Y N 1 rs�Ra s� �'�" G �� � .i3 s �--� �� � .^ � � .
���`� w��, t � F- 4!u "�;.� �:. �^ � y
� �� � � � ��
w
�� � i n � � ;
y � �_ w., � � �,.�k:� .�'� ygy;�,� � wS'3 4i r'ft ] y� +�4'j'S'� � "x.
�� � T�� . ��.��R 1���Rli�� '� �# -"�G . �x q
'rs�.' ,�'.n m' ✓r �� y µxi�¢.,i : �.
q?v..,� y, a� .�� i � 3, �r>,r+n k��° ha+ x fr � k...�'
M< _�
. ;... '. `y„� �' ��. �+" d d . � � g �)k� AC%.Y
�*R y-
� � � �*��°� „ � A� �"4���, �
� '' F ° �� � a�'��'� �; a� ,rr� s� � � . � � � ' +�, s ��
�"��'"""" � �a'T'. ae x, � . �, �.a f�, ��.
�,w. ��T .� �.' ��. � � a�z'�- �"r"
a,�+'+w�°. �#� � r.. � & : �r� r�s<. �� �A �(��z
��A� �" »+� -. � �"� � '�s i'� 3t% qya�b d ��II"��.
�, �'�'m`»�3 .. t �,���. ,.�.�±
-t ='- � .r;� .� -%
���8 ��d i t Z� a.w, ' � � �,,..,..� .,
�
3 ,�
:a� � �' ��£�� � � ,� ���x
, ��.1�°����d`� � g�
^^Y& �a` �h��g�a' �,b��� 3:
�� �
>�SC� °� b.
For a very detailed report on the status of cluster zoning, flexible zoning, and open space residential
design, see the Pioneer Institute report at: http://bit.ly/2zoBbWJ
The Trails at Santiago Creek Plan - as proposed now - does the most god for the most people
in the City of Orange. Please support this plan and let's improve our community while getting
rid of the gravel pit operation in the center of Orange Park Acres for good.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
z
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 7:57 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: There are Three Schools Within a Half Mile of the Gravel Pit
Importance: H igh
Dear Robert,
Let's take the issue of parks and open space off the table for a moment. Let's focus simply on the PUBLIC
HEALTH issues caused by the gravel pit. The sand and gravel operation creates plumes of dust and dirt every
time the Santa Ana winds blow and the air near the gravel pit is terrible. It is even worse when the operation is
up and ruiming at full capacity - as it will be again if the Trails at Santiago Creek proposal is allowed to be
defeated.
The EPA and the SCAQMD cited the gravel pit on two occasions in 2003 due to the impact of the documented
air pollution from the site. That is on the record. The fine particle silica dust documented in these citations is a
known carcinogen and is a genuine and serious health hazard and has no place in a residential community
adjacent to homes and school and playgrounds that are downwind from this site.
Aside from ones personal feeling about the development in the community, if the gravel pit operation is
reopened again, it will cause health issues for our children attending the three schools that lie within a half mile
of the Sully Miller site. SALEM SCHOOL is directly across the street from the site and the OAKRIDGE
PRIVATE SCHOOL and the LOMA LINDA ELEMENTRY SCHOOL are both just blocks away.
i
�y, �. , .. ���. ."�a... .:. � � ,� � � a : ,.� �
'A i� � v�5��`���4§i���� �� � `�e����,,,,�����- �.�`i'r.� s.� �'�,�3��.
�r ��� �,^ .a� 'r � � ;«.
,f �t � � y �a� �� �' �u ."'��� ��#
"�"� \ �' ��, �,� � ���� `� �� ,� ,e � �>� �y
�`.��� : � -� �� �'' , - � �� 7.r�#� � '' .
.
��� \ �. !� 3� :s'.o �^ :.�� � �lf�9 d �� �������
� � �� �z�.k. „
� � ���� ����� ` �, ' �� ������� ��
� . , � � � �� �� � y.<<� ����`� ,�,
��v �; ' ,,,� � � �° ,�s « � �.� �<��,�
� � �
`� � �� "� � �� � �'���� � � ,� ��; ,��'.
•k � µ��y �
�F�", �. � am �@� ,n� ��'i �, \ir�'�C��
�„ �"WP
. nA ° 9 � %..�.- ,-�� � s�,'�.^`' � f �E��J%�� � ��-e.-
� �
' s� Z� '�•�''. � � � �'�.'� � �P
'� . ..< x �, _„"
�� �.na � ��� � � �
a�, �m�m �s � � " �r� -�`� � �- ��,
� �'_ u c����
����.�,�-, � ;" r�.��%� �; ���� � .�, ��s��;k��� F�� '��� �; ,p,;, ���y
, ,n .y � � ��� �n� � _ �< � ;�'� t f«�',�,..���� ��,�, �€ .,.���r
ha"��
� � � :-.a°���'�,`_, �&��� "� ��r y���..",, � � .� _ "��,e���`y'
��.,� � �� ������a�� ����� -�� �; � a �.,� +"�y�3�,d��<, � v ��•.:
� i
�z ���"�� i�u" � t t "� � ° E�T� �}���' �� � � .
� �� � �� � � � � � � �.�� � �
� \� � � ���� � { ` � � �� � �";� � ��
� �. . � �o � ° � � �
�� � § ' � ' � � � � '�iy i a � � ,�
� ,. � '��w�w �«�7 � fe°, � - �»o�t.. � '�. � '
�
Q��� � � ���" ,������ �� ��� r���� ��; � � � �
-.i � • a,°�' :;. � 3�r ��� � ��, ��� ..4� �:,s �
5� �.
� �� � �
� ��
i��� k �y § . �. � � -
..� �-„ � . �" a�,l,' ��`$ � ��� �ap:t
y
+ �, � � .� . ������ .R�'`
fi>.� rl � # ,� �a� � S�\ ,�; �
{ - ��� 7 � �- __ �a,,.-.
'sxF� �, Z ,�� � T
+N �i�' � �'�� ��
� ,a, � r= �' ��.� � �5
,. W s� .�. ,, ., . . �,:..
s m ..� � �, � ,.. ��..
.2�s', x � . ��� 1� r,
,
N ..
�.:
�
E" i � «� � < . ^�' y�ua
' � ' �@:� • ���� �� $,4 ��.� � ��3=�
� � �Ay y` R ��� � \ �5�:�����€�' � �,. _{
' : � �,.
w.. �,��' � � '� ,h; ^" �, �
�
\
:� . ' _. _ � ,� '"��� , �-� � ``� ...�. .��:;r s
The dust generated from all gravel pit operations is not the same as the dust created by farming or other periodic
natural events. The killer is the fine particles of dust you cannot see. The mining and crushing of gravel creates
and releases fine particulate matter called Crystalline Silica into the air,which will be carried by the wind
towards homes and schools. These dangerous particles will permeate homes, neighborhood parks, schools, and
playgrounds. Adults and vulnerable children and seniors will be exposed to this harmful carcinogen every day,
all day.
Once these tiny particles enter the lung they stay there. The body's natural defense encapsulates them causing
permanent lung damage or cancer. Winds can carry these fine particles over great distances. The closer you are
to the source,the higher the concentration and danger Health effects can range from Silicosis, lung cancer,
tuberculosis increased lung irritation.
There is no cure for silicosis. Once these fine particles enter the lungs,the body has no means to expel them
Crystalline Silica clings to inanimate objects like homes, outdoor and playground equipment,trees,plants, and
grass and vehicles/cars, so you and your families will come into contact with it. Crystalline Silica will infiltrate
home and schools' heating and cooling system and there is no viable way to stop it or mitigate it.
The dust is cumulative; each day over the 20 or more years the pit is in operation more and more of this
hazardous dust will accumulate inside and around homes and the schools.
Please review just one of hundreds of articles on this very subject below for your reference that focus on the
Environmental Impacts of Aggregate Extraction:
http://uphe.or�wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Gravel-Pit-Fl,�pdf
2
SUPPORTING THE TRAILS AT SANTIAGO CREEK PROJECT MAKES ORANGE A HEALTHIER
PLACE FOR US ALL.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
_ __
� � '
3
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 1:06 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: The Trails at Santiago Creek Project Will NOT Impact Traffic Flow
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
The Opponents of Rezoning continue to claim that The Trails at Santiago Creek Project will make traffic in this
area worse despite the fact that the Final Environmental Impact Report shows that this is not true. An extensive
study in the EIR finds that the plan as proposed would have "no significant impact" on the traffic flow on
Santiago Canyon Rd. and/or Cannon Street. The Opposition claims are not supported by anything in the report.
The proposed Project's net traffic generation, after taking account for the current use, will result in an additional
542 daily vehicle trips compared to the current use. However, after taking account for the fact the truck traffic
from the current use is equivalent to at least 2 passenger vehicles per truck, depending on the truck size, the net
Project traffic generation is forecast to be 2421ess daily vehicle trips than the current use.
The $1 million provided by the landowner will pay for the widening of Santiago Canyon Road and re-striping
of Cannon Road will create an additional west bound lane on Santiago Canyon Road and a north bound lane on
Cannon. These improvements will be made PRIOR TO THE OCCUPANCY OF ANY HOMES.
I should also remind you that the gravel pit operation is dormant right now - and has been the last 2-3 years -by
mandate of the landowner during the approval process of this project. If the proposal for The Trails at Santiago
Creek is blocked,the landowner will be forced to resume full operation of the sand and gravel pit to produce the
only source of revenue available to them- and for those of you who recall what that is like, it would be a
nightmare in terms of the noise,the dust, and the TRAFFIC or large trucks entering and leaving the site all day.
Traffic would get much, much worse at that time.
These exhibits in the Final EIR depict the traffic flow improvements on these streets. In addition,the rock
crushing and gravel operation encompassing mining,rock crushing, stockpiling and related ancillary uses on the
current site, will be permanently closed as part of the proposal further reducing truck traffic in and out of the
gravel pit. I urge you to review the findings for yourself. The Entire traffic plan approved in the FINAL DEIR
can be reviewed online at:
https://www.cit oy foran�e.or�/DocumentCenter/View/7971/App-P---Traffic-Impact-Analysis
One thing is certain, if the gravel pit reopens, traffic WILL GET WORSE. I need not remind you that the gravel
pit operation is dormant right now - and has been the last 2-3 years - by mandate of the landowner during the
approval process of this project. If the proposal for The Trails at Santiago Creek is blocked,the landowner will
be forced to resume full operation of the sand and gravel pit to produce the only source of revenue available to
them- and for those of you who recall what that is like, it would be a nightmare in terms of the noise,the dust,
and the TRAFFIC or large trucks entering and leaving the site all day. Traffic would get much,much worse at
that time.
Supporting Rezoning will actually have the net effect of reducing traffic.
1
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
z
�---- _ ____._.�.�.._--___.�.�. �.�.._._.�._..M.__—____ —.
I ;
,, _ ��
_ .
_ ,,
;
.,
,
_ ,
_ �, _
; _ a
;
'( A ��?. .. �
� �, . . -�,�.--.�...
.
�-�., �� �
.�..t � � ,
i< t �,
o� ,.,. ��
�. .
. y a
� - .' . . : ' '. . - i y R . . tV
+ �
a ��
;. � I � �_ �i "��.
E ..
� .; p���- K
—
�: ��:. ,
, � . ,,
�.
E � , s, � .�< �:.. . � � �
_ ��
;_
;
��
I �: �i
+ x:.'' A p. - �
i; �
_ ,�
��
�::. ��-� � i f �.P 4 �-�,.. t
,' . '.� .
� _ .:
I a� ' �
,
_ g ; .
_
__ . _
, ,
,�a€a erm�rsrn�r€+�e r+oftm�oe
� �
� _:: : . .
�n"�"uao�s`r�ovo'n°aw�cr°+u°cFc� .. ;.:a
7t�E�GSiSeLrwtO.kCr.00.±aRu�r'io if+L...
:. j. .'..' . ... .':: . '.:.;. .". . . .. , .. . . . . . , . . . Y ..
' twsrarc rraccc-�ucnr su�±i�uic.�r
E
E �
--. . ��GFNt�p SiR�EL .:
_. .. . . ... . .. .. . . .,.. ...... . .... .. . . . . .
. .'.: . . � ' . . .. . . ' : �.� '� . . ..
`
�' . . . . . . .. .. .-. . .. ._. . . .. . . ; � .:
.I: : ... . . . . . . . . ... ...�
� ... . ...... . . . .... . ......... .... ... . .... . .... .. . .
��..........______________.,,....,,,,,.,..... ..�.. . . ' ... ...�».._.,..,..
...�.....�........:........ �...........,........,,.._w.�._..�,�.
3 ' . FIGURE 12 2
' �
�.: x a r � . . �
� �ko sc,u p � f
I c
� CONCE TUAL IbTPROVELlENT PLAN SAN'I1AG0 CANYON RO
�:i:..,. .._..., ;.:_.. _�.. _,,.,._..... ._._............ .. . . � . . PoO 5AnAnW ORAt#C£ � ..' .
� . ...... .......�.,,,. .. .... ._.,..,., .............. . ....a.. ..,�,........w...,.,..,..., . . . . .
...,,. ._..___„... .,.._.....,.....,- ....... . . ._:........_ . .. ,.,,.�.. ........... .
�: .,, .: � ..� �.. .. � . � � , , �, . . . . .
i; _ _ ._.�„ ..
l
........'f: ... . . . . .. , . . . . . . -.�
. .. .. . ' : , .. �
-.:::�. � .':. ' .' .... ... '. ,. .: . ' . . . . ..' . .. .
.... �. . ... ._ '.;.. . .... . . . . . ... . ' .. .
. . ... . . . . ... ... . . . .-. . . . . ' .. . � � .
� � i Q
�
, �.
: .. �.` • , x < ..
.j �' � '.c�j
� »
v w
i' . �,,, ` w.. �� ��,��"
' � ` �na, � � -
�
�.l. � �^E ..
�.
' .,.�, .'.� ....w;. �:�.."". <�
,....r, - ..�...
E. .. , � r� �.n�� , _
$
'.�': .' . ` E _ . .1 ' ''-� '_'
!. �
`� ����. � . u . .� '
N. .. , ` :R ' '.
��: . � .. , .. ..ty .
� � �
� n
..... i�..... r.,.�..
n
i:. b k Pi
'
1 a
� .;� '. ....
I�. ... � . .. . ... . ..- .. .. ... .� . . .. .. . ... . .. ..... ..�1
i.��. ,.�.: .. . .. .. .. . . - . � . . . .•��
t.: .. . � : . . . .. .
i... , � .� . . .. � . .
(i %�
; . - A A�
, .
,.. . . . . �1
, �
_ `.i �::� �!: ��. . _.' , . mi.�c eaun . . � ' .. � '.., .� - .
��, +'��I�+'y�{}'}�}I �i
�
.. �
_..:. . �-e.
�:: ! aca�c+�.-ac�+staccs etmccn �
3�.. .'. :'. ' . . . . SA7NShG0 CMiYGi R011I�A49 5[IXRA.KA . . . .. . ..�� .. ��
..: t.� . �:: . .; . . . . ... . AYkTiliE TD ApR A.FFCNG NL�it�96UNp. . '.*a .
E :
_ . .
�TtIF9V�H LANG. � .. . � . !:
�
\:�.._,.�....�.....v....,.... '. F . . . - � . ,.. .. . �. . � . � .. � . . .
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2019 1:57 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: The Foothills Sentry Propaganda Machine
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
I have to laugh at the article written by Tina Richards in The Foothills Sentry that came out today talking about
how many loads of dirt will have to come out of the gravel pit if this proposal is approved. She comes up with a
crazy number- something like 275,000 truckloads of dirt would have to be removed from the site -but never
gives a SOURCE as to where she comes up with this crazy number. Does anyone at"KeepOrangeSafe" own a
calculator?
Do some math. If it takes 5 minutes to load a dump truck on average (and I would think it takes much longer)
that is 12 trucks an hour. Assuming an 8 hour work day, five days a week,that is 961oads a day and 480 trucks
a week. That is 24,9601oads a year assuming no weeks off. At that rate it would take 11 YEARS to complete
275,000 truck loads.
This is just more scare tactics and fear mongering from OPA. Apparently, The Foothills Sentry has become the
propaganda machine for the Opponents of Rezoning in the last year. ,
Does the Foothills Sentry even care if the things it publishes are true or not?
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
' 1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 9:37 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Orange Parks Acres is More Than Just Equestrians
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
From Toni Bradley—one of the prime liaisons for the Orange Paxk Acres Residents - on NEXTDOOR.com:
"Clearly Mark you don't know horse people-we stick together and would LOVE nothing more than
having like minded people in our tiny slice of heaven. People that aren't so welcome are the ones
that buy an acre in an equestrian community and then complain about the smell, flies, whinnies, etc.
after furning their equestrian properfy into a typical OC suburban oasis sans horses."
We are dealing with a small irrational group of people who think that their needs and desires are more important
than anyone else that lives in the same community. These people are privileged elitists who only care about
themselves and those who ride horses in East Orange and everybody else is of no consequence.
As was pointed out by Ernest Glasgow of the City Planning Commission at their hearing, "Orange is
comprised of more than just Equestrians. When was fhe last time a horse was on the Sully Miller
properfy? 1 bef it has been nearly 100 years. We need to make a decision that is in the best interest of
everyone in the City of Orange."They approved the proposal by a vote of 4-1 based on this premise.
I respect their rights to try to create a better community,but they are not working WITH anyone on East Orange
to accomplish this. These people are not negotiating in good faith or make any effort to be sensitive to those
neighbors that live next to the gravel pit and have had to endure the noise and the dust for over 20 years. They
really don't care how their actions might impact anyone else in this community or the possible benefits to the
majority of residents in the City in doing so. When discussing this matter in a rational manner online I have
heard these people repeatedly tell me personally"if you don't like it,you can move".
Imagine if every day for over twenty years you started your day with the sound of the beeping of dump trucks
backing up,heavy machinery,bulldozers, and conveyor belts that sound like someone threw a load of bricks
into a cement mixer. Every day(except Sunday) it sounded like a battle zone on that property and all the while
the crushing equipment were spewing toxic dust and diesel fumes into the air covering your home with a fine
coating of grime that you also got to breathe in anytime you walked outside. Imagine this every day, six days a
week, for two decades. That is what those close to this site have had to endure.
To be frank,those Opposed to this project have been selfish, arrogant, and small-minded. They want to close
this community to anyone that does not fit their concept of those who should live in this area and hide behind
their"Specific Plan" and a means to do so.
Replacing the gravel pit with single-family homes,parks, trails, greenways, and open space should not even be
a subject for debate. It is obviously a decision that does the most good for the most people in the City of
Orange. Those of us who live around the gravel pit may be"unwelcome", but we matter just as much as they do
and we all vote.
1
CLOSE THE SAND & GI�AVEL OPERATION! YES TO PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.
SUPPORT The Trails at Santiago Creek and make Orange a better,healthier, and more beautiful place.
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
z
Robert Garcia
From: Troy Jenkins <troy@walkerwindows.com>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 9:44 AM
To: chip4orange@gmail.com; mayor@markamurphy.com; kimberleenichols120@gmail.com;
aIv360@aol.com; Robert Garcia
Subject: I Support the Trails at Santiago Creek Proposal
As a homeowner in this community I would like to see the Sand&Gravel Operation closed for good and this space
developed with homes and trails.
Thank You,
Walker Troy Jenkins
1601 White Alder Circle
Orange,CA 92869
1
Robert Garcia
From: Peggy Jaycox <peggy jaycox@icloud.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10,2019 4:49 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Orange Park Acres Proposal
I support The Trails at Santiago Creek Proposal that eliminates the gravel pit forever and creates new parks and open
space.
I have lived for twelve years with the dirt and noise from the gravel pit and it doesn't belong here anymore.
A resident of The Reserve
PeggyJaycox
Sent from my iPhone
1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 1:12 PM
To: Robert Garcia,
Subject: Opposing rezoning actually means supporting the return of the gravel pit operation!
Importance: High
Dear Robert,
There seems to be a notion that if the current proposal by the landowner for the Sully Miller property is
defeated,that somehow the people that privately own this land will simply give up trying to build on this
property and the City or County will somehow take over this land and create a park or open space area without
any homes. I hear this time and again from the opponents of this plan. This is absolutely not the case.
The fact is that the gravel pit on that land is PRIVATELY owned and has been in operation since 1918 for a
reason- it is very profitable! Hanson Aggregate which ran the Sully Miller Operation for years was reported to
make as much as a half million a month before the recent sand and gravel shortages.
i
� �g �"a,�,�y.wa '� � ,� sfi �: v" �. ,� . �q�.-^ �,�r- B s� �c a ��� � - . .
.."� �'"'� 3 € ° �' r � v�>.� -aa,,�,a� �s � '�*�� �. a� � 3�£� ;� ���� ��x�� , �� �' �
�9"�f� a� � e w�'� . � `' "�w°2 «� &�+�*�`7��� r a ���� �� ���� � ,� d� � -�
�� ���: �� ���».. �$,.n;� � � 'P"�_ ��a'v� : � � '�� �� .�,�g��?� �t�r k �w ��� . ��i���,� p -'�,� �
� t� '. ��„,a� r � ,��.
�" & � #'�}�tC � � , � � t� N
-� �2.� :�'�,�' �.Y�
: �,s ^. a�,�,,, r ,� � ��' � 1��s�� ��r g �� .�i���� �' � a�3� � � �' �*__ k' ��: a rs;.
��"w�u� 3 s ; ""� s s: 5 g �""v7� � � � �g ,. :,s� , 1 ix ' y.��,�e v*�+�' -v �a�:,-� .€
"���.. �. ��. x,� a u;,�'r,�$� � ���"�� � � �;,R.,—�.�e^^^^ � s,�.»«.�'"`.a� �: �'�. ���"� �
�..� ,� �''� � � '"�" ~�:���+ �,��.�,41� .s * *°"'..'" i� .. �5�. �u �£s 4 ���,� a, . �,� ..
, � , .�' � °� 4 :
�e �� � � ���.,,, �Yr,, � ����`.�"� �`�, �"p�^. �s����q�.��`�, e^{,¢� ��� �aµ�t!��` �. :r.,a�y '���' ; t
d� �' a ,,„a', z ss��n"' �e�t ��r�»+�'m✓ �..� ��� �� � �°1N" '�x«�c ����
�
�� ,.4°"`��� �� 9 ,,,uucar✓em� �.�,�" -' ��' +� W-; �� � 3�� �^���P �`� �py #. �YJh�.
�� � � � � �� �� �
�a�„ a �`" ..� �. -e. " x� � +«��_'0u :�z
�i� �„�,y���� � Y � ��.� N : � �P �p�'4¢.&� � �� � hm
&
� "a ��`, � � � �;�� � � ?,�� � s � y��l�
�',�� � �, � � �tm�-�. �. ,� � �n`"z`7� �& s � � � ,�" p,„'�
� � � �l.J � � �k.������` *"�i �.��� � � ,„�„��
. a 3 �,�; �,� � �' v�'" ���. �4� � a :�� �,sc',;;' ��2
. � � �� f
� � *.,. ������ $� � �� u�i� � r� � ��� � "s,
1 '&� .�,wy "^*� ,�rk*nr..« _ �"€���° �w,«.� +a g '.r �, 5
� � � ^� � .����. � .��� � � �� ����� �
'��M � � ��� � � �,�'�� y i � � � � �r �� ��� � ��.
i� GI't`�'''�''+�1R��iG�' ' � � � g � �� .,,� � ��..�.`�,�,.r7 �``'� � ���r"�'.�r,� �.� � . .. � t� � � �t
�».�,�, � ,y �� w s . n_R.s„� � �,� .�� -.�z 4 `' �.,
��� ��.^�KrR��4$��' � � � � � � �� ��e��y.�v � � � ��" �';� ����� �
� � '. �� � ����. ��. ..� ��^ �° �� �8 �� � - x #l'-.,b��` �' � �.
� �� � ��,� � w� � +�3 � �'��� �� t�7� � '� £ ���`��� � ��� ��� � � >
,; �,+� . ;:• �(""�",.«' ` t ,� � w , '�� � . vL ��� ,�"`. �� � a � � ��-i` �'�.�* ' ��- � #
�
� "L �n::" ^+`, ,� . .. R� �:aI k+- �-�� a. � �. �4 �� e�:u��w
�-= K�sF �e.� '��'�"., z� d'Y� �. � ;� �� �'s c �w '�y,'�, •"�ro � s��'.M..m� �
j� � �u K �' � � ��� �' c«""_ „����
8
r k � �s�•'�k '��'� ti ,.�s�t4�t .� r� �� ..,✓w : �
`� d�"�� � �`+", .� �' ��-'�� � `. ,�a„�'' � ,� �"��: �'.""""�� ��..`�� ��
:� ""k '�' � ��;r� � '��" � -�sr ,"� `ar� a; """""� � ,� r+,�r a� �n�
s' �l w : � � -�t ��. �'�� �� � � s���� � ������'� �� � �� �
.����� �°'�� ��n,.a:.�.,. i''�`; �.��� �.� x � .� - +F'k�s� �� �"9�!6', { � g�k� ,. ;�����
� �� � +�w.�-.�� � r � .�,. � ��' � 2�� '4 , ��"�,�"��°��' ���C�� �4�' y � M �a»,��a�
. �. fi ��� �� ,�
� a��� "`� ���� � '"� ' ��" � ��� � � '� ;�� ����� ° � �� '"� � � �
g ��wp. .�� k ��.:_ � � 3 _' �,� �'.'�.�,.�`'�� a �� t 3 �� °�,. �� � � k
i{ g
��._; (��� F�: S� ��� �.�a�' "����'� ��"'�i�"r'S Jf, .�� ��� � �, z h� ��'k. k'� �� ``�t�'r��
�� ��. �; �^"` � �;���`� �� �"� < � ���'� ��^�s�� �y � � � � x� ���`�#'• k.$�
�� � � � � �� � _�� � �#
� ��" �� .�y�` t ��'�"� �� ��t`€x `��� "�`�� �� �� � � � �"�"`��r� ~`� �!�?�$i«'��
�� �t�„��.w" �� ��::�'���� �w� � �'�"'^�' ;sf� `'�'`«�, , � :_ � �� � � �"'�'� "������I.�"';
}�� � ,,,,.t �� � �t�,'4 � � b �'�' � jo,,,„ ,K :tg�r .y s � a:� �J�'�,i�t`, ' �1 �ry��S
� �x �'�w �a:i �€ 1� �,�g� �' �,r« :����� '� ��`r �� �`z �� � �. 3 k .�'� «� '� YVIw, ���.Af���;
� ���' ' r��'`��A� ��'x�e� y� ���t��� � � `«�'+ � � i ��"�" § � >�;������� Iik�C'�tiil`4lkttf}�::
,
� _, ��la � m� �s ,;� 3�-�'i a - "".i.wr� '� ..,�ti
.. _,x, � ... � :, y ' , .�i� .:: .
,.,- . ,,.,,.. , , „.< . .;.
. . � . � _:.� ,»_.: ��" : '.�.:: �.:.;::: ;;: �.�«�Age
................. ... . . . .... . . .... . ..
................ .. .. .... .... .... . . ... , . . . . . . .
..../.;.�............. `[' `..�... . .. .. ... . .. .. . .
��4,d{:�'+����Lt��C.X��,I������� ���� ter{�Y��A W�1�4�ii�
.. ........ . . . .... . . . . ....w, .�... ..��..,..r....�..,..,.....,,
.:.'.:. '.-.". .. . . .. . �...:. . .... ... .. ..,.. .. . ... .. . ...... ... ... ...... ::
. . . �..... .:........ ......
��z�
The truth is that is this plan is somehow not approved,that land will remain zoned SAND & GRAVEL(S-G)
and the rock crushing and cement processing operation will once again return to East Orange at full capacity. If
the sand and gravel operation returns,the fact is that - in addition to the health and noise issues associated with
these sites -TRAFFIC will get MLTCH worse than it is now. The truth is that hundreds of daily trips in and out
of the gravel pit by large dump trucks will have far more of an impact than any traffic generated by the 128 new
homes on that land proposed.
Couple this with the already approved construction of 40+north of Santiago Creek adjacent to Maybury Ranch
that will occur if the current Trails at Santiago Creek proposal is defeated and the landowner actually proceeds
with the plan that the opponents of The Trails Project actually now SUPPORT as an alternative, and you will
have a nightmare traffic situation at the corner of Santiago Canyon and Cannon.
In short, Opposing rezoning means supporting the return of the gravel pit operation five days a week and
building more homes north of the Santiago Creek next to Mabury Ranch that will impact traffic congestion
further.
The Opponents of The Trails Proposal are supporting development but without the preservation of Santiago
Creek Greenway, open space, funding for trails, funding for traffic improvements or the dedication of
Ridgeline. The opponents of this plan seemingly want all of the negatives of this proposal without any of the
benefits. It just doesn't make sense.
z
Sincerely,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
3
Robert Garcia
From: ROBERT GERGER <rgerger@prodigy.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 6:11 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Re:City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing -Trails at Santiago Creek
Yeah thanks, I'm sitting in traffic on Santiago all the way back to the cemetery. I live up by Anaheim Hills Elementary to
take me an extra half hour and you want to put in more homes.You guys are full of it.
Sent from Rob's iPhone
On Sep 12,2019,at 5:13 PM, Robert Garcia<r�arcia@citvoforan�e.or�>wrote:
Hello,
You are receiving this email because you previously expressed interest in receiving more information on
the Trails at Santiago Creek project in the City of Orange.The proposed project has been Scheduled for a
City Council Hearing on September 24, 2019.
Regards,
�6ert Garcia
Senior Planner
City of Orange
(714)744-7231
Please be advised that City Hall is closed every other Friday.
For your convenience,please check the City website at
www.cityoforange.org for the calendar of working/closed days.
<'Trails at Santiago PH 9-24-19.pd�
i
Robert Garcia
From: Michelle Gregory <jonesvict@aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 6:46 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Re:City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing -Trails at Santiago Creek
Mr Garcia
Thank you for the updates. I am very disturbed by your actions and the planning vote! You singlehandedly have released
a toxic company into our community that will further harass, intimidate and lie to the citizens of Orange! Do you live in
Orange? I will hold you personally responsible .
Sincerely
Michelle Gregory
Cel 714-343-1964
On Sep 12,2019, at 5:13 PM, Robert Garcia<r�arcia@citvoforan�e.or�>wrote:
Hello,
You are receiving this email because you previously expressed interest in receiving more information on
the Trails at Santiago Creek project in the City of Orange.The proposed project has been Scheduled for a
City Council Hearing on September 24, 2019.
Regards,
�6ert Garcia
Senior Planner
City of Orange
(714)744-7231
Please be advised that City Hall is closed every other Friday.
For your convenience,please check the City website at
www.cityoforange.org for the calendar of workin�/closed days.
<T'rails at Santiago PH 9-24-19.pd�
1
Robert Garcia
From: cobra4me08@aol.com
Sent: Friday, September 13,2019 10:37 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Re:City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing -Trails at Santiago Creek
Mr. Garcia,
You can be sure that we will be there in force. Your biased (For Milan) recommendation
to the Planning Committee was a travesty to the community and an embarassment to
yourself. You should be ashamed of the "Work" you have done for Milan, and the way
you have used your position to trample the rights and desires of the residents who live
near this project.
Looking forward to the day that the O.C. District Attorney's Investigators knock on your
door, and want answers. I hope you have some prepared.
John Reina
City of Orange RESIDENT.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Garcia <rgarcia@cityoforange.org>
Sent: Thu, Sep 12, 2019 5:13 pm
Subject: City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing -Trails at Santiago Creek
Hello,
You are receiving this email because you previously expressed interest in receiving more information on the Trails at
Santiago Creek project in the City of Orange. The proposed project has been Scheduled for a City Council Hearing on
September 24, 2019.
Regards,
Robert Garcia
Senior Planner
City of Orange
(714)744-7231
Pleasc be advised that City Hall is closed every other Fridxy.
I'or your convenience,please check the City website at
www.cirioforanee.are fur the calendar uf worldng/closed days.
1
Robert Garcia
From: Mark Moore Fine Art <mark@markmooregallery.com>
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 11:47 AM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: An Email Exchange with Tina Richards of THE SENTRY
Importance: High
On Sep 13, 2019, at 11:27AM, editor@foothillssentry.com wrote:
Hi Mark,
1 haven't heard a single person say thaf the land will be turned into park land by the city or county or
that Milan will "give up." What 1 do hear is that Milan can and should build on the property already
zoned for housing and that rezoning the property fo satisfy Frank Elfend is not in the best interests of
the city in fhe long term.
Once it's rezoned r-1-8, the doors are.opened wide forhigh density housing. Since if is going to cost
a ton of money to reclaim the land and make it buildable, the only way a developer is gong to be able
to afford to do that is to put in high density housing. Everyone denies that now, but wait and see. It
won'f happen next year or maybe not any time soon, but it will happen. And the city will be compelled
to approve a high density tract because the zoning will support that. This is me talking, not OPA. So
don't be confused. I live in East Orange (not OPA) and moved there 30 years ago because it had
breathing room, unique to southern california. I realize times change, but good land use planning
goes a long way. And that does not exist in Orange County.
I was also amused that the engineering firm is now saying fhe truck trips listed in the EIR is a
mistake. That's convenient.
tina
Dear Tina,
With all due respect, the statements about the Sully Miller property being one giant park and
"remaining open space" are echoed constantly online by the folks that oppose rezoning. The Sentry
may not be making these statements, but the people opposing the project definitely are.
With that said, from everything I have read and all my research, I can find nothing that supports your
claim that rezoning the property for The Trails at Santiago Creek Project will lead to "high density
housing". That is just not the case. If you have evidence to support this claim, I would like to see it.
I agree with you that East Orange is a remarkable place. I do not see how 120 acres in new parks
and greenways will somehow impact your"breathing room" - in fact, it will increase it by removing a
fenced off gravel pit that is closed to the public, an eyesore, and bad for the health of everyone
around it. Sorry, but I don't see your point as to how this project does anything but make the
community a better place.
Finally, I wonder what YOU would do if it was YOUR kids breathing this dust in from the gravel pit
every day. Imagine if every day for over twenty years you started your day with the sound of the
beeping of dump trucks backing up, heavy machinery, bulldozers, and conveyor belts that sound like
someone threw a load of bricks into a cement mixer. Every day (except Sunday) it sounded like a
1
battle zone on that property and all the while the crushing equipment were spewing toxic dust and
diesel fumes into the air covering your home with a fine coating of grime that you also got to breathe
in anytime you walked outside. Imagine this every day, six days a week, for two decades. That is
what those close to this site have had to endure. This is the motivation for us to want to see the
gravel pit gone forever- and The Trails Proposal DOES THAT nicely!
Replacing the gravel pit with single-family homes, parks, trails, greenways, and open space should
not even be a subject for debate. It is obviously a decision that does the most good for the most
people in the City of Orange. Those os us who live around the gravel pit may be "unwelcome" (as has
been stated by the Opponents of Rezoning many times online), but we matter just as much as they
do and we all vote.
Blocking this plans does nothing to resolve the traffic, open space issues, or resolve the gravel pit
operation or clean up the site. There is absolutely no benefit to the community to "keeping things as
they are" - in fact, it will make things worse when this land and money is gone and homes are built
north of the creek anyway and traffic gets worse and the air is filled with toxic dust from the return of
the gravel pit operation again..
I am sorry, but I strongly disagree with your position. Approving The Trails at Santiago Creek makes
Orange a better, healthier, and more beautiful place and blocking it does not. Period.
All My Best,
Mark Moore
6507 Sycamore Glen Drive
Orange Park Acres, CA 92869
Phone: +1.310.266.2283
z
Robert Garcia
From: Howard Rothfeder <hrothfeder@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, September 13,2019 9:22 PM
To: Robert Garcia
Subject: Re:City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing -Trails at Santiago Creek
Not permanently closing down the gravel pit continues to put the Reseve and new
homes in unhealthy conditions. This is a public health
problem and should be resolved by Milan and city before we go any further. I have
asthma and do no feel anyone has the right to contaminate
the air I breath. After all 2nd hand smoke hurts others. I was hospitalized at Scripps
Clinic last week for 3 days. I am a retired MD. They close
factories who harm their neighbors why do we not close them down permanently. What
options do we have?
Howard Rothfeder
Howard
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Garcia <rgarcia@cityoforange.org>
Sent: Thu, Sep 12, 2019 5:13 pm
Subject: City of Orange Notice of Public Hearing-Trails at Santiago Creek
Hello,
You are receiving this email because you previously expressed interest in receiving more information on the Trails at
Santiago Creek project in the City of Orange. The proposed project has been Scheduled for a City Council Hearing on
September 24, 2019.
Regards,
Robert Garcia
Senior Planner
City of Orange
(714)744-7231
Plcase be advised that City Ilall is closed evcry othcr i'riday.
For your convenience,please cl�eck the City website at
www.citvoforanee.ore for the calendar of working/closed days.
1