To: Barbara Venezia, Interviewer-Feet to the Fire Forum

Candidates - state your position on Banning Ranch!

Costa Mesa voters need to know where City Council candidates stand regarding Banning Ranch.
Are the candidates for preservation of the last bit of unprotected coastal open space in Orange County or are they inclined for more development?
Barbara Venezia - Ask the question - Are you for or against the Banning Ranch Project?

Why is this important?

At the October 7 California Coastal Commission (CCC) hearing in Long Beach, the CCC staff recommended that the commissioners deny the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the proposed massive Banning Ranch development project. The CCC staff’s recommendation was based on the developer's proposed project heavily impacting the extensive Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), wetlands and Native American evidence on Banning Ranch, as well as other significant Coastal Act inconsistencies, In their report, the CCC staff described how, by reducing the development footprint to 11.5 acres, the developers could build a project that would be consistent with the Coastal Act.

The CCC staff report from the October hearing can be viewed at: http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2015/10/w9b-10-2015.pdf

Rather than deny the development permit, the commissioners voted in October to postpone their decision and directed the developer and the CCC staff to work together to find a project that could be approved.

In the months following the October hearing, the developer has submitted a reduced version of the proposed project that revised the development footprint from 124 acres to 85 acres. This revision seems more designed to secure a vote of a majority of the commissioners rather than a genuine attempt to bring the project into compliance with the Coastal Act. This proposed project still has nearly 900 homes, requires extensive grading (2.8 million cubic yards), and continues to result in significant impacts to ESHAs, wetlands and Native American evidence, and for these reasons, the Banning Ranch Conservancy opposes the developer's revised proposed project.

The project was scheduled for a vote in May (ultimately postponed at the developer's request). For the May hearing, the CCC staff prepared a report in which CCC staff reclassified some areas of ESHA as non-ESHA, significantly expanding the potential development footprint from 11.5 acres to 55 acres and recommended approval of the developer's proposed project as long as the approval was conditioned such that the project would fit into the 55-acre footprint identified by CCC staff.

The Banning Ranch Conservancy has strong objections to the CCC staff's reclassification of ESHA as non-ESHA and for this reason, we remain opposed to the proposed project, even with CCC staff's recommendations.