Fish Hatchery Road

Fish Hatchery Road is an isolated dirt road off Newport Avenue east of Garnet Street and north of Highway 38. It could lead to a new bridge across Mill Creek in the future.

Tim Krantz, vice chairman of the Crafton Hills Open Space Conservancy, presented an alternative on what to do with the 1,657 acres left over from the Seven Oaks Dam project: Sell it off as regional habitat mitigation bank.

It wouldn’t provide the rooftops to support retail and restaurants in Highland or build the roads the Harmony plan promised, but it would help Orange County officials recoup the $43.6 million investment it made to protect its citizens from deadly flooding in the past century.

“A mitigation bank is a formally sanctioned area that provides off-site mitigation for other projects with sensitive resources,” he told the Highland City Council in its special Aug. 8 meeting to dump the Harmony plans and cancel the vote. “In the case of the OC land at Highland, the site includes hundreds of acres of potentially salable sensitive habitats.”

Sensitive habitat in the Harmony project include 106 acres of chaparral, 117 acres of  Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, 124 acres of Riversidean sage scrub, 33 acres of riparian forest and 5 acres of ponds.

Krantz, a professor of environmental science at the University of Redlands, was reading from a letter to Thomas Miller, Orange County’s chief real estate office.

“The county could cash out their land holdings at top dollar,” he told Miller and the council, “typically at the appraised value of the land being developed down in the urban areas at current land values, which are at a premium.”

In his letter, that quote is in boldface and italicized.

So is this one: “Establishment of the Harmony project as a mitigation bank would enable the city of Highland to more easily move forward with development projects elsewhere within their own jurisdiction.”

For instance, the city recently approved a zone change between Greenspot Road and Pole Line Trail just north of the Santa Ana River Wash Habitat Conservation Plan that would allow some 500 new homes. Some of those housing projects might need habitat mitigation.

In parts of the habitat disturbed by the dam construction, Riversidean sage scrub has grown back, making it a candidate for mitigation, Krantz said.

Under the Natural Community Conservation Plan, instituted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife in 1991, a developer can swap land to develop projects in sensitive areas throughout the region by buying land in a mitigation bank.

Krantz cited an example of a proposed project in Upland that includes 20 acres that have been separated from its water source by development and flood-control projects.

The ratio for this mitigation measures favors the seller, Krantz said. Depending on the rarity of the plant, every acre to be mitigated would require the purchase of 4 to 5 acres from the mitigation bank, he said, citing the Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, which is quite valuable.

“If the proposed development habitat has threatened or endangered species on it, the mitigation ratio is even higher if that habitat exists in the ‘bank,’ ” Krantz said.

If there is an endangered species on the property, such as federally protected least Bell’s vireo, the mitigation would be 10 to 1. There are 33 acres of habitat in the Harmony property that would be suitable for the tiny bird, which has been on the federal endangered species list since 1986.

The Santa Ana River Wash Habitat Conservation Plan — which is awaiting Senate approval for a land swap with mining companies to maximize the conservation area — is west of the Harmony property. The 3,400-acre Crafton Hills Preserve is south of the property.

Krantz volunteered to work with Orange County and Highland on establishing the land bank.

More than 9.5 million acres have been set aside for habitat protection in California.

They including the Central and Coastal Subregion of Orange County, the Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and the Coachella Valley Habitat Conservation Plan.

(4) comments


Professor Krantz has a good idea but now that the land entitlements must revert back to the original zoning identified in Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) 2865 that was approved on September 28, 2000 for the transfer of 3,220 acres known as the "Greenspot Sphere" from San Bernardino County to City of Highland (:AFCO 2865 was a reorganization and annexation for the 3,220 acres) also included a "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for Greenspot Sphere Area General Plan Amendment and Annexation" listed in a May 2, 2000 letter by the former :AFCO Analyst Kathleen Rollins McDonald. The City is responsible to manage and report on specific and designated "mitigation" acreage and was part of the 1,657 acres. Unfortunately, when the "annexation" of the 3,220 acres was completed the City forgot to "record" the acreage with the County's Recorder pursuant to California law Public Resources Code Paragraph 201801.6 effective January 1, 1989. Appendix "B" Mitigation and Monitoring Plan is available for everyone to read.


Once the 1,657 acres revert back to its original zoning of 432 acres Agricultural/Equestrian, 1,278 acres Open Space, 1,510 Rural Living (1 house per 5 acres) total 3,220 acres; then the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) can re-engage to understand WHY the 1,657 acres were "quit claimed" by San Bernardino County to Orange County and memorialized in the march 14, 2000 Orange County Minute Order.....6 months BEFORE LAFCO 2865 was finalized on September 28, 2000? The Seven Oaks Dam was completed in December 1999, the USACE continued to be the Project Manager designated by the U S Congress, the 1,657 acres was part of the 'Local Cooperation Agreement" managed by USACE, Orange County, San Bernardino County, and Riverside County were the three "co-sponsors" and subject to the rules/provisions of the 29 page LCA, the LCA does not contain any provision to REMOVE property like 1,657 acres from the LCA, but on March 14, 2000 San Bernardino County "quit claimed" their 1,657 acres to Orange County? How does that work anyway? Based on these facts Orange County may not be the OWNER of the 1,657 acres? Where did Professor Krantz come up with $40M plus that Orange County paid for the 1,657 acres? Please tell me and show me the canceled check?


We all know the san Bernardino County Property Tax Payer paid $30M plus for the 1,657 acres via an "eminent Domain Lawsuit" final judgment dated 12-15-1997 Superior Court of California County of San Bernardino Case No. SCV256860 titled: san Bernardino County v Blue Banner. Orange County never paid monies for the 1,675....on the other hand Orange County did pay their annual cost sharing percentage of 87% along with co-sponsors San Bernardino County and Riverside County.....but those were annual operating/maintenance
t ownership costs.


So, Professor Krantz before we start talking "mitigation bank" let's find out who actually owns the 1,657 acres!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.