Oil production impacts Yorba Linda history

Oil production--one factor impacting Yorba Linda's early development--no longer plays an important role in local politics, as partly evidenced by the City Council's non-controversial action formalizing standards for building activity near the city's remaining active and more plentiful capped wells.

But years ago, various oil companies leasing mineral rights on hundreds of acres in the local area used their economic power to forestall Yorba Linda from becoming a city, with the issue of allowing an incorporation vote finally decided by California's Supreme Court.

The oil companies--several of which became land developers in more recent times--feared possible imposition of a severance tax, according to a 1988 oral history interview with incorporation lawyer and first City Attorney Jim Erickson by Dennis Swift for Cal State Fullerton.

Oil interests filed sufficient protests to deny cityhood petitions, since oil and gas leases were included in land valuations. City proponents eliminated as much oil land from the original city boundaries as they could, but enough remained to stop an incorporation vote, Erickson noted.

Erickson said he was prepared to argue against including oil and gas leases in land values, but that wasn't necessary because the court ruled the protests weren't timely filed, ending a years long legal battle and forcing the county Board of Supervisors to allow a 1967 cityhood vote.

Compared to surrounding Atwood, Brea, Fullerton, Olinda, Placentia and Richfield, Yorba Linda was late in oil development, with exploration coming in the 1930s, and a successful well drilled in 1937 during the initial production period.

Shell Oil geologist E. G. Heath, in an article titled “Yorba Linda Oil Field” for a 1958 oil guide, stated the 1937 well “touched off an outbreak of drilling which lasted for seven years,” noting that “little drilling” occurred 1944-54, until another discovery led to more activity into 1958.

The impact on Yorba Linda was described by David “Whit” Cromwell in a 1970 oral history interview by Milan Pavlovich for Cal State Fullerton. Cromwell was an early postmaster before his election to the first City Council.

Cromwell said Yorba Linda's early oil industry was second to agriculture, with some farmers doubling as workers in nearby fields, noting that drilling near Richfield Road did “pretty well.”

“But the strongest influence the oil industry had on Yorba Linda was that the few farmers who had any oil lease money and in some cases got some oil income were better off than the rest of us,” Cromwell said.

One strange story involves Richard Nixon's birthplace property and a comment Nixon made about his father's lemon grove in his 1974 farewell speech: “It was the poorest lemon ranch in California, I can assure you. He sold it before they found oil on it.”

Nixon told the fanciful story several times and included the quote in his “Memoirs,” but, of course, as most Yorba Lindans are aware, no oil was ever drilled from birthplace property.

Abandoned oil wells regulations adopted

The intriguing story of Yorba Linda's 76-year history of oil production added a new chapter recently with a unanimous City Council adopting an ordinance with regulations for building on properties with active or abandoned oil wells.

The new ordinance applies to both developers of vacant properties and owners who want to make certain additions or alterations to parcels with homes and businesses already in place.

The regulations aren't new hurdles to land development, since they replicate rules previously overseen by a state agency--the Department of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources--that no longer provides construction site plan reviews and “well status” review letters.

According to agency statistics, properties in what is historically called the Yorba Linda Field have 1,218 “well types,” with 653 wells “having production,” but most are labeled “plugged.” The agency's listing noted 37 leases and 14 operators.

One Vista Del Verde development, Foxfield, with 94 single-family homes, has 55 abandoned wells that required venting before construction, and the 3.2 acre Bastanchury Road land once planned for Friends Christian High School has some 21 wells that needed attention.

A report prepared by city building official Bob Silva notes the ordinance establishes rules that address “major areas of concern,” and enforcement will provide “a high level of public safety” when building on land with active and abandoned wells.

Developers must provide site development maps “indicating the location of all wells and st-ructures with dimensions between each other as well as to the property lines,” Silva noted.

No new structures on vacant or previously developed parcels “shall be constructed within 10 feet of the center of the well on three sides with the fourth side to be maintained open” but city staff “may approve alternative mitigation measures that maintain access to wells.”

And importantly, the ordinance calls for leak testing of abandoned wells, including a sniff test for gas leakage and a visual inspection for oil leakage processed through the Orange County Fire Authority within 12 months before issuing a building permit.

One recommendation from city staff requiring a permanent marker at the center of each identified well was dropped from the final ordinance and replaced by voluntary language.

But if a marker is installed, the device “may be relied on for the exact location of the abandoned well for any future development,” thus saving the property owner from a significant cost involved in another survey pinpointing the exact location of a well.

Yorba Linda lagged in local oil discovery, with the first commercially successful well completed in 1937, 40 years after the first Brea-Olinda well drilled in 1897.

This city's new oil well ordinance draws attention to Yorba Linda's drilling history, and next week's column will delve into how oil changed Yorba Linda history and examine a strange story told about an imagined “black gold” discovery on the Richard Nixon birthplace property.

Politicians scramble for low-density identity

One ever-present issue in Yorba Linda involves residential density, as measured by the number of houses, condominiums and apartments permitted per acre, with city politicians scrambling to position themselves as low-density advocates and label adversaries as pro-moters of a developer-friendly urbanized environment.

Longtime residents might remember a main reason the incorporation vote won in 1967 was community members wanted to wrest development decisions from county officials they saw as approving too many apartments and gasoline stations.

And many of the early city's heated arguments focused on appropriate density levels, with some factions contending for no more than 2.0 units per acre and others who were just as adamant that 2.5 fit the semi-rural identity they desired.

Now, of course, the figures have shifted, with voter-approved densities ranging from 10 to 30 units per acre on several properties, mostly on the westend, to meet state mandates to allow opportunities for lower-cost or “affordable” housing.

The current density debate will only get more vocal as individuals and groups emerge to contest a City Council election for two seats on the five-member body just a year ahead.

Already the city's density numbers and housing allotments are bandied about without context or full explanations, and sometimes with misrepresentations, so let's examine city- and state-prepared documents with a focus on the most relevant numbers.

The state's Regional Housing Needs Assessment report says Yorba Linda must plan for 669 housing units at all income levels in the new 2014-21 time frame. This time the city has been given a longer, eight-year planning period because an October deadline was met.

Of the 669 units, nearly 60 percent (396) are specified for “moderate” incomes (126) and “above moderate” incomes (270). “Moderate” incomes are from 81 to 120 percent of the state-defined area median income and “above moderate” incomes are above 120 percent.

The state's 2012 figures for the “above moderate” income category start at $71,651 for a one-person household; $81,901 for two; $92,101 for three; and $102,501 for four. The “moderate” category starts at $53,951 for one; $61,651 for two; $69,351 for three; and $77,051 for four.

Lower income units total 273, 160 for “very low” and 113 for “low” income households, with “very low” up to 50 percent and “low” at 51 to 80 percent of the area median, and actual numbers ranging to the starting incomes cited for the “moderate” category.

Due to the zoning density opportunities developed for non-market rate units during the prior five-year planning period, including property rezoned in the June 2012 election, the city has “a site capacity buffer of 623 units for the 2014-21 time period,” noted an October report from Community Development Director Steve Harris.

The buffer means the city now exceeds state requirements through 2021 and would allow recently rezoned properties to include market-rate, not just lower-cost housing.