Irvine Co. Will Make Its Case for Building in East Orange

Concerns over urban runoff, endangered species and what critics call a breakneck approach to paving over some of Orange County’s last undeveloped land are likely to bring out opponents in full force tonight to Orange’s planning commission meeting.

The agency is to consider recommending that the City Council approve the Irvine Co.’s revised 518-acre Santiago Hills II project in East Orange, the first phase of a controversial plan to bring more than 12,000 new homes to the base of the Santa Ana Mountains.

“This is the last of the back country,” said opponent and local resident Theresa Sears. “This is it--after this there’s nothing else. It has tremendous value. My whole plea is going to be: ‘Please slow down and be thoughtful.’ ”

Situated near an equestrian community and the county’s oldest grove of live-oak trees, the proposed project was first included in a general plan adopted by the city in 1989. Now the developer is moving forward to seek approvals necessary to begin building, possibly in less than a year.

“I think essentially we’re ready to go,” said Stanton Soo-Hoo, community planning manager for the city. But “I couldn’t even hazard a guess” on whether the planning commission will vote to recommend the project.

The proposal has significant local opposition, some of which is addressed in a consultant’s 1 1/2-inch-thick report released by the city in late August. Two federal agencies also have lingering concerns.

Nestled between two regional parks, the site being discussed tonight is a triangular tract roughly bordered by Jamboree Road, Irvine Regional Park and the Eastern Transportation Corridor. The project is the first phase of a plan to develop 7,110 acres in what opponents say is an Irvine Co. ploy of “piece-mealing” the approvals process to avoid scrutiny of the cumulative environmental impact.

Irvine Co. spokesman Rich Elbaum said building the project in segments is the only sensible option.

“Generally, projects get proposed in phases. It isn’t unique to the Irvine Co.,” he said. “There are many factors: One, it’s a more manageable project. And two, market conditions and variations make it impossible to predict.”

Environmentalists worry that cumulative effects may be glossed over, especially because environmental impact studies will not be completed until next spring at the earliest.

“Proposals of this size are really our last opportunity to carry out regional comprehensive wildlife conservation, especially here, with the property being located near Cleveland National Forest,” said David Hogan, urban wildlands coordinator for the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity’s San Diego office. “Consideration and approval of this project by the city of Orange prior to completion of surveys would be an absolute tragedy for sensitive wildlife.”

Some of the planning has been based on surveys completed 11 years ago, before such rare bird species as the California gnatcatcher and southwestern willow flycatcher were listed as threatened or endangered by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. However, federal and state law requires studies be completed within a year prior to the beginning of construction.

BonTerra Consulting of Costa Mesa, which prepared the environmental documents for the project, wrote in August that the earliest the project could start is July 15, 2001, so the only way to have meaningful studies that capture current conditions would be to do the work in spring 2001.

If endangered or threatened species are discovered on the project site, planning would be changed either to avoid them or to compensate for harm, Elbaum said.

Shirley Grindle, organizer of the East Orange Neighborhood Committee, said that strategy puts the cart before the horse, citing the endangered least Bell’s vireo as an example.

“In respect to the least Bell’s vireo surveys, we’re concerned that the project not proceed down a path of assuming there will be no least Bell’s vireos,” she said, noting that the bird is found in adjacent Peters Canyon Regional Park.

William Miller of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Carlsbad office said that the developer’s studies would comply with the law, but the agency has other concerns. One of those is whether the reconfiguration of an open space area just south of Santiago Canyon Road and east of Jamboree that could result in the loss, or “take,” of gnatcatchers or the coastal sage scrub in which they nest. Under Orange County’s Natural Communities Conservation Plan, the developer agreed to give away large pieces of land in exchange for being able to develop elsewhere. However, the service and the developer disagree over whether the take caused by the reconfiguration is permitted under the agreement.

“For the most part I think, they did a reasonable job,” Miller said of the Irvine Co. but added that he does not believe the developer has the authority to take gnatcatchers in the open space area. He said the agency also is concerned about effects on mulefat scrub, though the consultant dismissed them as insignificant.

“Vireos use mulefat scrub as nesting substrate,” Miller said.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also is generally pleased with the latest plans but hopes the developer will use 100-foot buffers around wetlands, streams and riparian habitat, said Jae Chung, project manager with the Corps. The developer has agreed to at least 50 feet and will have an average of 100-foot buffers.

“They’re avoiding all the jurisdictional wetlands and high-value willows, so that was very nice to hear. Now, the next stage is to minimize impacts from development to existing resources,” Chung said. “As a buffer becomes greater, the impacts to water quality are minimized. And the greater amount of buffer also insures indirect impacts to sensitive biota in wetlands is also minimized.”

Critics say they have yet to see any specifics in the runoff management plan. “This is new ground that’s being set,” Grindle said. “There’s no provision for review in the future.”

Elbaum said details are unavailable until the planning process gets further along and that the public will have a voice in the process because the plans will be reviewed by Orange County and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.

The developer has already made a number of concessions on Santiago Hills II, such as allowing the city to eliminate a 25-acre commercial center, reducing the number of homes to a maximum of 1,746, paying the city up to $3 million in recreation fees and providing up to $17.8 million in a school construction loan to Orange Unified School District that will be repaid by new homeowners.

Regardless of changes, the consensus is that wildlife will be affected.

“Certainly, the project will result in increased urbanization,” Miller said. “From the standpoint of wildlife conservation, it means there will be less habitat. . . . But it’s the balancing of the competing interests of economic development and conservation of sensitive species.”