San Juan Plans ‘Central Park’ to Protect Its Vanishing Open Space

Nestled between Trabuco and Oso creeks lies an undisturbed piece of yesteryear, where wooden farmhouses and fruit stands can still be found under the shade of majestic eucalyptus and live oak trees.

It is the northern entrance to this historic city, a rural buffer zone that separates the traditional home of the swallows from the increasingly urban landscape that marks neighboring Laguna Niguel.

But, city officials warn, residential and commercial developers are already wooing owners with promises of high returns in exchange for the 120-acre agricultural preserve--a quiet refuge of orange groves and persimmon patches along Camino Capistrano, north of Junipero Serra Road.

Eager to maintain the area in its current state, city officials will today unveil an ambitious plan for a $20-million bond issue to purchase the preserve and transform it into a city-owned “Central Park.”

At an 11:30 a.m. press conference, to be held on the proposed park site, city officials are expected to announce that they are considering calling a special April election. The bond sale needs approval by two-thirds of the city’s registered voters, according to Michael McNamara, a private financial consultant hired by the city.

If the bond sale is approved, property owners would be assessed an average of $5.83 per month for the next 20 years, McNamara said.

Mayor Gary L. Hausdorfer said city officials envision a sprawling park with tree-lined walkways, horse paths and baseball and soccer fields, all anchored by a community and senior center. The plan would also preserve some of the agricultural land and orange trees in community garden settings.

The plan, Hausdorfer said, is another example of San Juan Capistrano’s commitment to keep the city as rural as possible in the fast-developing South County.

“San Juan has a long history of caring about values more than economics,” he said. “This is open space that cannot be replaced.”

Citing Tuesday’s failure of Measure M, a half-cent sales tax measure for transportation improvements, Hausdorfer conceded that efforts to raise taxes in the county do not appear to be popular.

But, he added, “San Juan (residents) have had a long history of saying: ‘We’re different, and we’re going to do some things differently.’ ”

Some property owners in the proposed park area have long been critical of the city-imposed agricultural preserve category, which prevents them from developing the property unless it is sold. They were skeptical that the city would raise enough money to succeed with the park idea, which was first raised in 1975.

“They are not going to buy any 120 acres with $20 million,” said John Swanner, 68, who owns 38 acres of the farmland along with his brother and two cousins. “They’ve been talking about doing this for years.”

Swanner and other landowners have complained that the agricultural preserve category, which went into effect in 1977, has limited their options on how they can best use their property.

In the meantime, they say, they are losing thousands of dollars by paying rising property-tax assessments for land that is not producing sufficient revenue.

There are more than 40 property owners who have shares in four separate farming estates in the proposed park area. Many of the owners are related to the original farmers who first planted the orange groves in 1916.

“The farmers have held the land (rather than sell it to developers), and they’ve been the losers because of it,” said Bill Bathgate, a caretaker and part owner of some of the preserve land. “They’ve waited patiently for the city . . . to put it crudely . . . to put up or shut up.”

Developers who purchase the property would have to apply to the city to remove the agricultural preserve restrictions but could then develop the property, according to city zoning law.

The idea to carve the city’s only large park out of the farmland was first proposed by the Planning Commission in 1975. Under the proposal, the City Council was asked to approve a bond purchase to acquire 136 acres of farmland at a cost ranging from $4 million to $7 million.

The council rejected the plan by a 3-2 vote.

“City policy (at that time) was to continue with an agricultural use,” said former councilman Roy Byrnes, who favored purchasing the land through the sale of bonds. “After that, the decision to do a bond was never forced on the city.”

The farming area is one of two large undeveloped parcels left in the city. The other farm area is bounded by Alipaz Street, Camino del Avion and Del Obispo Street.

The city is also studying that parcel of land for purchase to protect it against future development.

The series of ridgelines that wind through the city have also been permanently protected from development by city ordinance.

Hausdorfer said if the land were to be developed by private companies, they would have to pay up to $50 million to shore up the eroding creek beds that converge on the southern tip of the agricultural preserve.

They would also have to provide a safe crossing for the Atchinson, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway tracks, which bisect the land.