Save Saddleback Canyon from urban sprawl

The public hearing and Board of Supervisors vote on Saddle Crest Homes has been scheduled.

WHEN: Tuesday, October 2, 2012, 1:30 pm

WHERE: Board of Supervisors Hearing Room, 10 Civic Center Plaza, at the corner of Santa Ana Boulevard and Broadway in Santa Ana

PLEASE plan to attend this critical meeting at which the Board will vote whether to approve this ill-conceived, inappropriate development that will forever change the landscape and rules for future development in the rural canyons and all OC unincorporated areas.

PLEASE sign the petition:
http://signon.org/sign/orange-county-supervisors?source=s.icn.em.mt&r_by...

PLEASE send a letter directly to the Orange County Supervisors telling them to REJECT Saddle Crest Homes and the General Plan and FTSP amendments proposed by this single developer.  Here are the details...

    COPY/PASTE the sample message below to the county supervisors and COPY/PASTE the following addresses into the "TO" line of your email message:
    JANET.NGUYEN@OCGOV.COM, DISTRICT2@OCGOV.COM, BILL.CAMPBELL@OCGOV.COM, INFO@TODDSPITZER.COM, AUDRA.ADAMS@OCGOV.COM, PATBATES@OCGOV.COM

Dear Orange County Supervisor,
    As a concerned resident of Orange County, I urge you to reject the proposed development by Rutter Development of 65 residential homes called “Saddle Crest” in Trabuco Canyon and require the developer to     conform to the current requirements of the Foothill/Trabuco Specific Plan (FTSP) and Orange County General Plan.
    To shoe-horn in this ill-suited project, the developer is planning to change not only the FTSP but also the County’s General Plan in ways that will have wide-ranging implications for all of OC’s unincorporated areas. For sure, the developer’s plan contravenes the FTSP in many critical ways and allows the developer to proceed with a flawed plan that would be detrimental to a unique Orange County resource and would massively increase traffic on Santiago Canyon Road.  As you know, the FTSP as it currently stands does allow for appropriate development while creating a buffer between OC’s ever-expanding urban areas and the wilderness of the Cleveland National Forest. All OC residents value the rural canyons and find these local areas essential for recreation and renewal.
Rutter’s specific project calls for broad changes not only to the FTSP, but to the entire General Plan and all specific plans, with very significant ramifications for this and all future development throughout Orange County.
   Also, the project is completely at odds with the County's recently adopted “Sustainable Communities Strategy” (SCS), which is supposed to guide growth policies to avoid sprawl and help meet mandated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
   These are all reasons why you should vote NO on Rutter’s Saddle Crest project. Please insist that this developer propose a project that meets the requirements of the FTSP to ensure that the area continues to be rural in character and preserves our natural resources for generations to come. Do not allow a developer with an overly aggressive plan to set Orange County land-use policy.
   Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts in this matter. Please incorporate my comments into the administrative record for the Saddle Crest project.
   Signed,

   [Your name]

If you value the unique landscape and communities that lie to the southeast under the shadow of Saddleback Mountain, we need your help to protect the local foothill communities from an ill-conceived plan that will allow rampant development of the last rural vestiges of Orange County. Rutter Development is proposing sweeping changes to the planning rules that govern the rural canyon areas of Orange County. So sweeping are the proposed changes, the area won’t be even considered “rural” any more!  Rutter is proposing an initial 65 homes - called “Saddle Crest” - within Trabuco Canyon (they have hundreds of acres in the area), the planning rules of which are currently specified in the Foothill/Trabuco Specific Plan (FTSP). This document was hammered out a couple of decades ago with local residents, land owners, and county officials to recognize the unique geological and natural features, wildlife, and scenic aspects of the foothill canyon areas and allow for appropriate development while providing a buffer between the increasing OC urban sprawl and the wilderness of the adjacent Cleveland National Forest. So far, the planning document has worked well, allowing for the development of homes for people interested in enjoying what a rural lifestyle offers (horses, wildlife, oak trees, natural beauty) without actually destroying the area in the process. Visitors abound, especially on weekends, coming by the hundreds on motorcycles, bicycles, and by car to enjoy what these unique foothill areas have to offer.

Simply put, Saddle Crest is contrary to the requirements of the FTSP in just about every way.  Rutter has not ever, not once offered a plan that meets the requirements of the FTSP, which seeks to preserve the rural character of the area.  In fact, several years ago, Rutter tried to develop the same parcel of land – plus another close by – but those plans also did not meet the FTSP's requirements and eventually the development proposal, after being approved by the OC Board of Supervisors, was thrown out by the courts in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of conservation organizations.  Nonetheless, the developer is back and, so far, the County is expediting the process to approve to this latest non-conforming plan. Now the developer (working in conjunction with the best minds in the OC planning and legal departments) has come up with a scheme to deal with the regulations it fails to meet. How? By unilaterally changing the rules.

No fewer than 15 amendments to the OC General Plan and FTSP are being proposed to allow this dense tract development adjacent to unique open space resources (Cleveland National Forest and Limestone-Whiting Regional Park).  These changes are being done in a way that stands land-use planning on its head. But there’s even more to it than that. The General Plan and FTSP are being changed to give the OC supervisors freedom to approve not just Rutter’s 65-home Saddle Crest project, but anything it believes is in “overall harmony” with the General Plan or any specific plan throughout the county -  even if it violates important goals and objectives of those plans. Rutter, and all developers that follow, will be free to pick and choose which rules they find to be a nuisance and thus ignored. These “anything goes” rules will apply not only to the FTSP area, but to the whole of Orange County.  Modjeska and Silverado Canyons are already under great threat, but areas you might not think of – like Coto de Caza and North Tustin – will also become subject to the whims of developers and the supervisors who are influenced to approve their projects. (Check the the public records for campaign contributions of Rutter and its lobbyists and consultants and you’ll find that they are major contributors to every supervisor’s campaign.) 

The proposed project causes a huge increase in the volume of traffic on Santiago Canyon Road – much more than what the General Plan says the road can safely handle. If you've traveled on Santiago Canyon Road, you know that it is a generally winding, undivided, rural, scenic highway that has steep grades and curves. It is already considered dangerous by many, even the County itself (numerous traffic accidents that frequently block the road can attest to this). Weekends bring hundreds of bikers and cyclists to the road as well. Although you might think this would be a show-stopper for the developer and the county, the developer is instead proposing to change the way traffic is measured to give a false conclusion of "no significant impact." By changing the way that the “safe” volume of traffic is determined – from its current “rural highway” type designation to a simplistic urban-type approach – the safety impacts associated with a massive increase in traffic volume magically disappear.

The developer is also proposing to change the rules about grading and removal of natural vegetation (oak trees, chaparral) and preserving wildlife corridors.  The project will create cut and fill slopes 70 or 80 feet high, not currently allowed under the FTSP. The FTSP has a goal of “preserving oak woodlands.”  How to deal with this? You’ve guessed it. Change the rules again! The developer is proposing to cut down 151 oak trees, some over 3 feet in diameter, and root-up the understory that the local wildlife need to survive. The developer is planning to mitigate this loss of trees and wildlife habitat by planting acorns!  Another brilliant solution to the developer’s problem of its project not passing muster with the FTSP.  And the changes go beyond just SaddleCrest: these proposed changes to the FTSP will allow any future developer’s hired arborist to decide that acorn-planting is perfectly appropriate “mitigation” if any ancient oak won’t survive transplantation. And did we mention that eight Saddle Crest houses will be jammed up against the wildlife corridor that connects to Limestone-Whiting Regional Park?

If we don’t come together as a community to fend this off, we will see the eventual demise of this unique and beautiful rural area. None of these changes needs to come to pass. It is our county and our community. Let’s influence shortsighted politicians who are throwing their weight behind this developer’s plan and put this project in the trash where it belongs. Insist that the developer come up with a plan that meets the requirements of the FTSP. Do not let them change the FTSP and the county General Plan without a proper airing and discussion of all the ramifications by all those who have an interest including land owners and, yes, the people who live in the FTSP and other foothill areas with similar specific plans (e.g., Silverado and Modjeska Canyons, Coto de Caza, and North Tustin). These areas will be hurt also.

Don’t let a rapacious developer destroy our community and a treasured gem that is available for enjoyment by all of Orange County. Let us at least try to give generations to come the opportunity to live in and enjoy what’s left of a unique and magnificent area of Orange County.

Send a letter directly to the Orange County Supervisors telling them to REJECT Saddle Crest Homes and the General Plan and FTSP amendments proposed by this single developer.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

For information, please visit our webpage www.saddlebackcanyons.org and our Facebook page at www.savethecanyons.org.  

Thanks everyone!

Rich Gomez   949-939-5935 cell
Gloria Sefton  949-422-3413 cell

Saddleback Canyons Task Force - Sierra Club