Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - 75DMitre -Ramirez, Norma From: gvande6576 <gvande6576@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 5:12 PM To: eComment Subject: Against 2525 N. Main, Santa Ana. Categories: DONE As a 4th generation Santa Ana family resident and current resident of Park Santiago Santa Ana... I am against the rezoning of this property from comerical to residential of any sort. Thank you Gil Van Der Marliere 2219 N..Spurgeon St Santa Ana,.Ca 92706 Sent from my Sprint Phone. 1 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Sent: To: Subject: Categories: To Whom this may Concern, Betsy Iverson <betivers@gmail.com> Saturday, November 2, 2019 9:40 AM eComment 2525 Main Residential Project Opposition DONE My husband and I have worked our adult lives to be in a position to purchase a house in a nice neighborhood where we can raise our family. This project threatens to jeopardize everything we have worked for. We intentionally chose Park Santiago because of the placement of this neighborhood, I have always referred to it as a pocket surrounded by a park, train tracks and the freeway. By building this residential project in our neighborhood, everything that makes this neighborhood great would crumble. The traffic will be horrendous with transients coming through our neighborhood. The traffic on Main will be even worse than it already is. Have you tried to get parking in the Mother's Market lot? It is already extremely challenging and this will only make it worse. There are a number of huge complexes slated for development in our area. The city is not thinking about the big picture effects of this on our community. California is already losing residents in droves, these types of projects will only encourage additional exodus by responsible tax paying citizens likes ourselves. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE 2525 MAIN PROJECT IN SANTA ANA. Sincerely, Pete and Mary Iverson Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Elizabeth Bruckner <elizabethbruckner@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:48 AM To: eComment Subject: 2525 N. Main Street Categories: DONE To whom it may concern, I am a registered voter and resident of the Park Santiago neighborhood. Please take my opinion into consideration. I oppose the development of an apartment complex at 2525 North Main Street. It is zoned commercial to protect our neighborhood from increased traffic and parking issues. If you care about the concerns of your citizens, you will support my opposition. Thank you, Elizabeth Bruckner 609 East Buffalo Avenue Santa Ana, CA Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Robert P <rlplatfoot@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 5:10 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 N. Main Steet This project does not align with Park Santiago neighborhood and should be left as a commercial property. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Adeline Allen <adeline.allen@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 6:14 PM To: eComment Subject: City Council: Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development Dear members of the Santa Ana City Council: Greetings, and thank you for your service for our city. Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development. The Planning Commission voted against it the second time on October 28, even after the proposal had gone through a revision. The Planning Commission was right to vote against it (again). And you'll be exactly right to vote against it when it comes up before you. Since the proposal's revision, it has been reduced in volume. But it is still too crowded for the neighborhood. There is no justifiable reason to rezone the space when there are thousands of new apartments currently being built within a few square miles of it —with many units built in the last few years still remaining empty today. In support of the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA), I oppose any rezoning and General Plan amendment to 2525 Main Street Residential development. Please take care to keep the zoning at 2525 Main Street as is, as it has long been. Rezoning or general amendment change on the 2525 Main Residential Development is not for the common good of the city. Please vote no on the development. Some say that the City Council may dismiss Park Santiago's opposition as owing to cantankerousness as a result of the neighborhood's (perceived) demographics: white, old, conservative. and rich. But let me submit to you that even if the demographics (1) were accurate and (2) were in fact related to the opposition, they are irrelevant to the validity of the opposition. In other words, why should Park Santiago's concerns be invalidated due to the citizens' race, ethnicity, age, and household income group? Such disparate treatment would be unjust and un-American. It may be surprising that I am, in fact, a thirty -six -year -old woman, mother of two young children, and first -generation immigrant from a poor South East Asian country. And yet I live in Park Santiago. Not that my background should matter, because the citizens' concerns should be considered on their merits. They are valid because we live here and would be the ones most affected by the development. Please vote no on the development. Thank you. Sincerely, Adeline A. Allen 529 Virginia Avenue Santa Ana, California 92706 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 development From: swestrom@aol.com [mailto:swestrom@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 7:22 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 development Dear Mayor, As an original home owner in Park Santiago I strongly urge to maintain the existing zone and land use rules as the Planning Commission as voted. The developers should be able to work within these guide lines. The already approved developments, Main Place, Town and County area, and 2700 N. Main should be enough of an impact on our area. Thank you for considering my neighborhood. Susan Westom Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development From: Houston, Nicole <N Houston @santa-ana.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 9:33 AM To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org> Subject: FW: Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.or¢ 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 0j -2020 cerjsus SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Adeline Allen [mailto:adeline.allen@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2019 5:30 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development Dear Mayor Pulido: Greetings, and thank you for your service for our city. Please vote no on the 2525 Main Street Development, as you did before. The Planning Commission voted against it the second time on October 28, even after the proposal had gone through a revision. The Planning Commission was right to vote against it (again). And you'll be exactly right to vote against it when it comes up before you. Since the proposal's revision, it has been reduced in volume. But it is still too crowded for the neighborhood. There is no justifiable reason to rezone the space when there are thousands of new apartments currently being built within a few square miles of it —with many units built in the last few years still remaining empty today. In support of the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA), I oppose any rezoning and General Plan amendment to 2525 Main Street Residential development. Please take care to keep the zoning at 2525 Main Street as is, as it has long been. Rezoning or general amendment change on the 2525 Main Residential Development is not for the common good of the city. Please vote no on the development. Some say that the City Council may dismiss Park Santiago's opposition as owing to cantankerousness as a result of the neighborhood's (perceived) demographics: white, old, conservative, and rich. But let me submit to you that even if the demographics (1) were accurate and (2) were in fact related to the opposition, they are irrelevant to the validity of the opposition. In other words, why should Park Santiago's concerns be invalidated due to the citizens' race, ethnicity, age, and household income group? Such disparate treatment would be unjust and un-American. It may be surprising that I am, in fact, a thirty -six -year -old woman, mother of two young children, and first -generation immigrant from a poor South East Asian country. And yet I live in Park Santiago. Not that my background should matter, because the citizens' concerns should be considered on their merits. They are valid because we live here and would be the ones most affected by the development. Please vote no on the development. Thank you. Sincerely, Adeline A. Allen 529 Virginia Avenue Santa Ana, California 92706 z Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 project From: Glenda Newcomer [mailto:Bcn4@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 7:20 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.or6>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.or6>; dpenaloza@santaana.or6; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.or6>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.or6>; Iglesias, Cecilia <CIglesias@santa-ana.orR> Subject: 2525 project was born and raised in SA and I have lived in Park Santiago since 1963. 1 urge you to vote NO on the 2525 project. 1.Traffic is already a nightmare, cars are lined up 15 cars deep, especially at key hours, this occurs on Santa Clara, Broadway, Main and both North and South all trying to use the North and South freeway ramps which are also blocked. 2.Parking in our neighborhood is already maxed out-2 lanes now down to one because of all the cars parked on both sides of the street. 3. Another major issue is there is over 3000 plus apartments being built or already finished within .05 Miles do 2525, they will be going through our neighborhood to avoid the traffic on 17th, Main and Broadway. PLEASE VOTE NO on 2525 and NO on ReZoning—This is not the vision we need for Santa Ana or our neighborhood. We don't want to become another LA. Glenda Newcomer Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: I oppose the current plan for 2525 North Main St From: Mark Hay [mailto:mnhay2000@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 6:03 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Cc: Mark Hay <mnhay2000@yahoo.com> Subject: I oppose the current plan for 2525 North Main St Hello Mayor Pulido, My name is Mark Hay, I am a resident and home owner at 316 Edgewood Rd, Santa Ana, 92706, in the Park Santiago neighborhood. I oppose the current proposed plan for apartment development at 2525 N. Main St in Santa Ana. 1. The density is higher than is reasonable for our neighborhood, for this part of Santa Ana, and specifically for the intersection of Main St and Edgewood Rd. This intersection is already affected by heavy traffic between 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm, rush hour drive times. 2. Environmental Impact Reports by the developer for this project have failed to take into account the effect on traffic of the high density apartment developments that are currently being built around the intersection of Town and Country Rd and Lawson Way in Orange, immediately to the north of 2525 North Main. They have also failed to take into account the high -density developments that are planned for the area that is currently Main Place Mall. All these developments will create a significant increase in traffic along Main St at the intersections of Main St. and Edgewood Rd. and Main St. and Memory Lane. Main St. and Memory Lane is the next major intersection 2 blocks north of Main St and Edgewood Rd. These two intersections currently experience high traffic during the hours of 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm. 3. Environmental Impact Reports have taken NO REALISTIC ACCOUNT of the effect the 2525 N Main development will have on PARKING IN and TRAFFIC THROUGH Park Santiago neighborhood, along Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara, for apartment residents t desiring alternate access to 17 St, and the 22 and 55 fwys. Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara are all 2 lane roads with homes on both sides. There are a lot of children in our neighborhood as well as Hoover Elementary School on Santa Clara. I could support a plan for apartment development at a lower density of 100-200 units on the site at 2525 N. Main St. I support a parking space ratio of 2 spaces per unit at this lower density. I also support the addition of parking for the Discovery Science Center to have overflow parking at the site planned at 2525 North Main st. Thank you, Mark Hay 316 Edgewood Rd Santa Ana 92706 z Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 Main St Project Attachments: Microsoft Outlook - Memo Style.pdf; Microsoft Outlook - Memo Style.pdf -----Original Message ----- From: ahfuller43@roadrunner.com <ahfuller43@roadrunner.com> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:22 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org>; Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St Project To All Concerned: This parcel is not suited for ANY high density development. Main Street is too congested now and any additional traffic will make any use of the master corridor of Santa Ana completely unusable. Marilyn Fuller 2422 Santiago Santa Ana Sent from my Wad Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Dale Helvig <helvig_denny@msn.com> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 11:41 AM To: eComment, City Council; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Thai, Minh; Fregoso, Vince; Kelaher, Selena; Mark Earthlink McLoughlin; Alberta AOL Christy, Phillip Gmail Schaefer, 'Mike O'Valle' Subject: 2019-11-11 Letter to City Council - 11/19/2019 Meeting Attachments: 2019-11-11 Letter to City Council.pdf Categories: DONE Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 11, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Item to Consider at November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting I am opposed the 2525 Main Residential development. The economic analysis that was performed by RSG for the revised project of 256 units shows the net income in 2017$ over 25 years will be $6.729 million (NPV), or $269k per year (2017$) over 25 years. This is far below the $24.5 million ($980k per year) mentioned at the Sept. 5th Community meeting and included in the Developers Sept. 13th Project Submittal. Don't buy into their mis-information tactics. See attached file for more details. Santa Ana can and should do better! Respectfully, U 4. t Dale A Helvig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) P.S. Happy Veteran's Day cc: citycouncil@santa-ana.or� eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Alberta Christy Chair, Historic Resources Commission Phil Schaefer, Vice Chair, Historic Resources Commission Michael O'Valle, President, Park Santiago Neighborhood Association (PSNA) Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 11, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8ti, Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Item to Consider at November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting I am opposed the 2525 Main Residential development. The economic analysis that was performed by RSG for the revised project of 256 units shows the net income in 2017$ over 25 years will be $6.729 million (NPV), or $269k per year (2017$) over 25 years. This is far below the $24.5 million ($980k per year) mentioned at the Sept. 5th Community meeting and included in the Developers Sept. 13th Project Submittal. Don't buy into their mis-information tactics. Santa Ana can and should do better! Respectfully, U 4. It Dale A Helv�ig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) P.S. Happy Veteran's Day cc: citycouncil@santa@santa-ana.org eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Alberta Christy Chair, Historic Resources Commission Phil Schaefer, Vice Chair, Historic Resources Commission Michael C'Valle, President, Park Santiago Neighborhood Association (PSNA) Page 1 of 1 2019-11-11 Letter to City Council.doc Planning and Building Agency Planning Division 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 www.santa-ana.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION www.santa•ana.org I. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project: See attached II. Provide the lot size and square footage of all buildings: The lot size is 5.9 acres and the SF of the residential building will be approximately 277,281 SF and the Parking Garage will be approximately 167,253 SF. III. Describe what type of hazardous materials — if any — will be stored on the site: None IV. Describe the size, height, and proposed use of each building: There will be one multi -family residential apartment building on site that will be a maximum of 49' 5" feet in height that wraps around a parking structure that will be a maximum of 58'11" feet in height. V. Describe the project floor area ratio or density: 45.76 DU/Acre VI. Provide the total number of required and proposed on -site parking spaces for the project and describe site access location points: See attached. Page 1 of 2 cm\dre forms\ project description 1.06 Planning and Building Agency Planning Division 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 www.santa-ana.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION www.santa•ana.org VII. Are any off -site parking spaces proposed? If yes, please describe the number and location: Vill. Describe the project phasing: This project will be built in one phase. IX. Describe grading operations and the amount (cubic feet) of soil to be moved, if applicable: _ rol I MIMM Tror.-IM if• - 1 - . 1MI1 • . 11 a - - below existing tirade. This will generate approximately 25,000 CY of soil to be moved. There will likely be over -ex required under the proposed buildings which could generate 23,000 to 32,000 CY of soil to be moved. Total soil to be moved=48,000 CY to 57,000 CY (subject to change upon soil report) X. Describe the nature of any trees and landscaping to be removed: All perimeter landscaping XI. Describe the operational characteristics of the project (proposed hours of operation, proposed type of ABC license, and unique characteristics of the proposed use): The project will be a multi -family residential apartment complex and a parking lot. XII. Other pertinent information about the project: Page 2 of 2 cm\dre forms\ project description 1.06 2525 N. Main Street, Santa Ana, CA — The Addington Project Description The project proposes the redevelopment of a 5.9-acre site to provide 256 for rent, multi -family residential units. The proposed development will tier from 2 to 4 stories and include 3 courtyards, wrapped around a parking structure with 399 stalls and a rooftop pool deck. The unit mix will be approximately 70% studio and 1-bedroom units and approximately 30% 2- and 3-bedroom units. The unit sizes remain unchanged from previous submissions. Existing surface parking will remain surrounding the project: one lot flanking the east side of the project ("East Lot") with 112 stalls, accessible to residents via the parking structure and one lot flanking the south side of the project ("South Lot')with 180 stalls accessible via Main Street. These existing surface parking lots will provide a total of 292 stalls available for use by both the project residents and the Discovery Cube patrons. The applicant will process a lot line adjustment to separate the parking use from the multi -family use and permit separate ownership. A shared parking agreement will manage the surface parking. The project will have a minimum parking ratio of 2.0 stalls per unit and a shared ratio of 2.66 stalls per unit. The project will be smoke, and vapor free and the residential building's interior amenities will include a fitness center, movie theater, community wi-fi, a presentation room, a business center, a club room/pub and on -site concierge and maintenance teams. The exterior amenities for the project will include 5 landscaped courtyards, rooftop pool and spa, cabanas with TVs, outdoor lounge, outdoor fireplaces, BBQs, bike sharing, electric car chargers and 24-hour security patrol. The highest point of the residential building will be 49' 5" and the highest part of the parking structure will be 58' 11". The project density will be 45.76 dwelling units per acre. There will be a minimum setback of 90' to the east, between the back fences of the homes along Spurgeon and the apartment building. In some areas the building setback is as much as 200' due to the placement of the east courtyards. On the south side of the site, there will be a 136' 8" setback. Extensive landscape will be provided along the perimeter of the site and all existing trees currently at the eastern edge and along Edgewood will be maintained in place. Access to the South Lot will be via a right-in/right-out driveway on Main Street. Access to the project will be via a signalized intersection at Main Street/Walkie Way. There will be no access for the residents or Cube patrons on Edgewood. The project applications include a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Environmental Impact Report and Development Agreement. The project will provide approximately; $3.6 million in affordable housing in -lieu fees, $2.9 million in development fees, and $687,502 net revenue for first year, resulting in a first -year revenue totaling approximately $7.3 million to the City. Over 25 years, the total net City revenue from the project will be approximately $24.5 million. BETTER COMMUNITIES. BOLDER FUTURES. DATE: October 10, 2019 TO: Jeremy Ogulnick 2525 MAIN ST LLC FROM: James Simon, Principal 17872'aJU d'=.'E. 714 341 4585 JI'_ 7 ?50 1 NFOCd�WEBRSG.COM RIANE, CA 9251.-, WEBRSGCOM Via Electronic Mail SUBJECT: SECOND ADDENDUM TO FISCAL IMPACT STUDY 256-UNIT ALTERNATIVE / 2525 MAIN STREET, SANTA ANA In December 2017, RSG provided 2525 Main LLC a fiscal and economic impact analysis of a 517-unit multifamily residential development proposed for the northeast corner of Main Street and Edgewood Lane, in the City of Santa Ana. The first addendum to the fiscal impact study was prepared based on a reduced project scope of 347 units on July 11, 2019. The most recent addendum study estimated that the 347 unit project would generate approximately $15.8 million in net new general fund tax revenues to the City over a 25-year period. RSG was recently informed that the developer is considering an even smaller project, roughly equivalent to half the original project scope, consisting of 256 multifamily residential units. This memorandum provides the approximate reduced impact of the project under this alternative, resulting in the following impacts to the City over a 25-year period: Gross recurring General Fund revenues of $16.6 million; General Fund operating impacts of $5.0 million Net new General Fund impacts of $11.6 million. Our forecast of these projected impacts accompanies this memorandum, which include cumulative 25 year projections and the net present value assuming a 4% discount rate. • BERKELEY 41 L\ClientsCmcard Gump, They 5251,1 Main -Santa AnaQ0191010 Addendum 256 Unit c a. m Q U N M Q U z zQ Q � Z U U) W K LU W W z U) W Z z Q w � W Z LO LO LO N N R O-qT O � W O V V M 0 0 -qT N O V O M 0 M 0-qT O Y O Cn Ccl O O M Cn a LA M O O I1 M N O Lf M N f, � � W W C0 N O S f� � M M ll'l 00 N ll'l 'tt 'tt O O ll'l ' 4) Non monMV V A O O ll'l I z Y d z ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� ff� 1 LA Ln RV O CO CO V M F Ln Ln a;::- Ln V M CO O O M V F CO O M V O 00 = W O CO W CO = N = W M W N CO = r CO W M 0 N 0 0 0 M M CO = W CO CO r CO V M 0 COT N 0 O IT 00N� N N N 00M O 0 CO V CO Ln N O W �= M V V V Ln Ln CO CO r r W W O O O N M M V ------------------------ Ln CO CO EH EH EH EH EH EH EH EH EH EH EH UH UH UH UH UH UH UH UH UH 69 69 69 69 69 b V O O V L(7 ONO W N O Ln r O V M Ln O O W O M r O O � i 0 O CO r O CO W Cb 00 O N = O V O O N O N O CO O O 01 V M M CO CO O Ln M V W V V 0CO = O = CO V Ln O W O Ln V CO I W 0 N N CO CO I W O = M LO r O M CO O V W N r N H M O CO M O N C 0 O W O O = N V 0 CO r O O = M V 0 r W O= M 0 CO W O 0 � N M V V L(7 Ln Ln Ln Ln L(7 Ln Ln CO (O CO CO CO CO CO r � r r r r CO i X CO M W r M O M CO O= V CO MT O CO V n O CO CO O M R O V O r O T M V 0 r = 0 O COT N N M n W M O r n F V I O N 0 W= V r O V r V W N CO O V W M r N � N CO M M M M M 0 0 0 N N N M M V V V 0 0 CO CO 01 C 7 m Efl M V CO O r O 0 M W r 0 M V M CO N N MT 0 0 0 O R d O M O =V= N CO T CO N N CO V r Ln r V CO M 0 M r � Cp CO I CO O O N V CO O N CO O V O V O CO M O W CO 0 V V C Vl T n CO r O O N M 0 CO W O O N V 0 r O O N V CO OO 01 .O R M M M M M V V V V V V V V L(7 Ln Ln Ln Ln L(7 CO CO CO CO CO D 01 F N � � W 0 Efl r M 0 W N O M N W M W n n O M W O r 0 n O W 0 O L O O N O N O N O M N CO CO N N r O W V W = ' r O M r � CO O CO N CO Ln N O CO r CO CO r M CO O N Ln O V i X N V n CO W O N V 0 r O N V CO 000 N 0 r 0)IT'T W F IT IT 'T 'T 'T LO LO LO LO LO LO CO CO CO CO CO r � r r r 00 Y X r— W H O CO W W CO M N M W O M O W O CO O— M r 0 O R O 0 V O N= CO W r M CO CO M 00 N r N CO M O O D W CO F CO W O= M CO O M W V O r 0 M Cl) Cl) V LO W= LO r M= O y O V r = V r O V r= 0 CO N CO O V W N CO = n O V O V O J 0 0 0 CO CO CO � m W W O O O O O N N N N N N N N N O. C O — X CO O O CO M O N W W n O O r N M CO O N_ V O = O 0 R O M O M I0 N CO O N 0 M O O 00 M W Ln CO N O O CO M M r CO i � N Ln W 000 Ln M M N_ N IT CO CO O N Ln O I �N O N � N� N� N CO M O Ln H M O CO N O CO N O S V N i + Ln M V V L(7 Ln CO CO r� W W O O O N M M V Ln CO CO r CO i N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M i O O N M V Ln (O r CO O O N M V Ln (O r W O O N M V 0 N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M V V V V V 00000000000000000000000000 R 01 C�C�� N M V Ln(OI� COO � NNNN N M 00 I N 07 N � O 1 � � 1 O MT o 1 O W O i O O co LO 0) I � O � N 1 � � 00 N o M N O 06 07 ( h N N LO 'T LO LA d O 0 M O O M � N00 0 o� N M O N N CO N N O m 00 r C 00 LO LO d, d, N LO o m O O LO O V M f� M O LO M d, d, M o LO V O m O CJ COLO 00 a Q 0 Z 0) Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Council Members, bobi keenan <fosca94@gmail.com> Tuesday, November 12, 2019 8:39 AM eComment 2525 North Main Street Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the Council Meeting on November 19th. In the strongest way possible, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed rezoning of this property from commercial to residential! I am unalterably opposed to the project of a multi -unit, multi -story apartment building on this site! The negative impact on the adjacent Park Santiago Neighborhood will be severe and permanent if this proposal is approved by you. Park Santiago is among the "Crown Jewels" of Santa Ana's beautiful historic neighborhoods. It, and other historic neighborhoods in our City should be valued, protected and preserved. As a homeowner in Washington Square, another of our City's beautiful & historic neighborhoods, I am very concerned about this issue. We too have adjacent land along Bristol Street that will be developed and the thought of a huge, multi -story residential complex next to us is cringe -worthy. Please take the advice of our Planning Commission and vote NO on the 2525 North Main development before you. Sincerely, bobi keenan 919 Louise Street Santa Ana 92703 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Santa Ana Resident, Letter Regarding Nov. 19th City Council Meeting From: Gerardo Sanchez[mailto:Rsi8908@csu.fullerton.edu] Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 4:11 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.orR> Subject: Santa Ana Resident, Letter Regarding Nov. 19th City Council Meeting Dear Mayor Miguel Pulido, Hope you're doing well. I would like to submit a letter on behalf of myself and my family. I have attached the letter to this email and I hope you can take my letter into consideration when you vote on the proposed 2525 Main Residential Development project. Thank you for your time. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! From: Diane Fradkin[mailto:dianefradkin@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 9:16 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! Importance: High Mayor Pulido: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though...... 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times.... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole community.... not just another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. I would encourage you to follow your Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the project and uphold the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Dale Helvig <helvig_denny@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 3:59 PM To: eComment, City Council; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Thai, Minh; Fregoso, Vince; Kelaher, Selena; Mark Earthlink McLoughlin; Alberta AOL Christy, Phillip Gmail Schaefer, 'Mike O'Valle' Subject: 2019-11-12 Letter to City Council Attachments: 2019-11-12 Letter to City Council.pdf Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 12, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Item to Consider at November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting (#2) The Santiago Park Maintenance & Improvement Contribution has been drastically decreased. Current Version of Development Agreement: [BOLD added for emphasis] Santiago Park Improvement Construction. At the City's determination, Owner shall manage and construct the Santiago Park Phase II Park Improvements ("Park Improvements") subject to review and approval by the City [... ]. Owner shall be responsible for all aspects of the Park Improvements. [... ]. Following completion of the Park Improvements, and no later than three years from the issuance of a notice of acceptance of Park Improvements, City shall reimburse Owner an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the total cost of the Park Improvements, up to Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) ("Reimbursement Amount") for actual, third party costs associated with the Park Improvements. Why would the City allow a no bid contract of One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400.000) to be issued for park improvements to an owner that has refused to budge from "we only do high density residential projects". They have refused to even consider medium density residential. Furthermore, the idea of having the City reimburse the Owner up to Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) just complicates the issue. The owner should just pay the Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000), period. Respectfully, A.I t Dale A Helvig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) cc: citycouncil@santa-ana.or� eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Alberta Christy Chair, Historic Resources Commission Phil Schaefer, Vice Chair, Historic Resources Commission Michael O'Valle, President, Park Santiago Neighborhood Association (PSNA) Previous Version of Development Agreement: Within One Hundred Eighty (180) days after the issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall either pay One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400,000) to the City for the construction of the Park Improvements (Park Improvement Funds) or Owner shall be authorized by the City to construct the Park Improvements at Owner's sole cost and expense up to One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400.000). Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 12, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8ti, Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Item to Consider at November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting (#2) The Santiago Park Maintenance & Improvement Contribution has been drastically decreased. Current Version of Development Agreement: [BOLD added for emphasis] Santiago Park Improvement Construction. At the City's determination, Owner shall manage and construct the Santiago Park Phase II Park Improvements ("Park Improvements") subject to review and approval by the City [... ]. Owner shall be responsible for all aspects of the Park Improvements. [... ]. Following completion of the Park Improvements, and no later than three years from the issuance of a notice of acceptance of Park Improvements, City shall reimburse Owner an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the total cost of the Park Improvements, up to Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) ("Reimbursement Amount") for actual, third party costs associated with the Park Improvements. Why would the City allow a no bid contract of One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400.000) to be issued for park improvements to an owner that has refused to budge from "we only do high density residential projects". They have refused to even consider medium density residential. Furthermore, the idea of having the City reimburse the Owner up to Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) just complicates the issue. The owner should just pay the Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000), period. Respectfully, QJZ4.It Dale A Helvig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) Page 1 of 2 2019-11-12 Letter to City Council.doc Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com cc: citycouncil@santa-ana.org eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Alberta Christy Chair. Historic Resources Commission Phil Schaefer, Vice Chair. Historic Resources Commission Michael C'Valle, President, Park Santiago Neighborhood Association (PSNA) Previous Version of Development Agreement: Within One Hundred Eighty (180) days after the issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall either pay One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400,000) to the City for the construction of the Park Improvements (Park Improvement Funds) or Owner shall be authorized by the City to construct the Park Improvements at Owner' s sole cost and expense up to One Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($ 1,400.000). Page 2 of 2 2019-11-12 Letter to city council.doc Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Request for Adaptation of 11-19-2019 Council Meeting Format for Agenda Item: 2525 Main Street Development From: Ellen Koldewey [mailto:mrskold@vahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 3:22 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.orR> Cc: CRidRe@santa-ana.orR; Gomez, Daisy <dRomez@santa-ana.orR>; Thai, Minh <mthai@santa-ana.org>; Carvalho, Sonia R. <SCarvalho@santa-ana.orR> Subject: Request for Adaptation of 11-19-2019 Council Meeting Format for Agenda Item: 2525 Main Street Development Greetings Mayor Pulido, I am writing to you as Chair of our City Council to ask you to adapt the format of the upcoming Council Meeting on the agenda item considering the 2525 Main Street Project on November 19, 2019 to allow opponents, as well as the developer, planning department, and other proponents, a fair opportunity to be heard. 1 • Specifically, I request that you authorize for all who ask: • use of the City or private overhead projector or other audio-visual equipment to present information, • donation of individual 2 minute speaker time to representative speakers so they may speak for 10 or more minutes without interruption; and • organization of speakers into groups to allow the coherent presentation of each group's position and supporting information. 2 These adaptations should be available to the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA), neighborhood associations, other organizations such as labor unions, as well as other individual speakers on both sides of the issue. I believe these adaptations are essential to allow those on both sides of this complex and contentious issue to be fairly heard, present their ideas and information effectively, and develop a complete and accurate record on which you may base a reasoned and impartial decision. With due respect, I have found the Council's manner of considering the merits of the 2525 Main Street development so far to be exhausting, largely uninformative, and, at times, just plain unfair. I believe that if the project's opponents continue to be limited in their ability to date to effectively present their case at Council, the Council may be deprived of the information you need to make a thoughtful and informed decision. I therefore respectfully request that the City now make requested technological aids and presentation time available not only to the developer and Planning Department but to others who wish to present their ideas and information to the Council, including those who oppose the project. Time is of the essence. These requests have already been made by various constituents to the City Attorney, Clerk, and/or City Manager. Please notify the public as soon as these procedures are put in place so that all will have the opportunity to adequately prepare before the Council Meeting next week. Thank you for your consideration and your service to our City. I am a concerned constituent and voter. Respectfully Submitted, Mrs. Ellen Koldewey Santa Ana CA 92706 1 As a Ward 3 voter, I rely on Councilmember Solorio and other public officials who have compared the City Council meeting to an evidentiary hearing and stated that the Council's decision is "quasi judicial" in nature. For example, my Ward Representative recently stated, "I've mentioned this before online and in different neighborhood meetings, but because project and permit approvals like this one are quasi-judicial City Council actions and not legislative actions, we are not supposed to advocate either side. That would be a violation of a fair and due process. Ask our City Attorney or any other City Attorney in the state and they will tell you the same thing. Like judges, we're supposed to be as neutral as possible and only hear information from the hearings and the process and make decisions based on that. During the last Council hearing, I did not vote for 2525 based on the collective information I received and heard. " (J Solorio, Floral Park Next Door, Edited 27 Oct 19) 2 Presently, It is understood that the developer and the Planning Department, have use of the City's overhead projector or other equipment to make audio-visual presentations as well as verbal presentations at the Council meeting. They are given sufficient time to speak in support of their project. In addition, individual development supporters, are given two minutes each to speak. On the other hand, others, including opponents of the project, have been denied the use of audio-visual equipment, and have been informed they are limited to individual two minute presentations. All have access to Ecomment, meetings with, and email to councilmembers. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Opposition to 2525 Main Street Development - November 19, 2019 Council Meeting From: Ellen Koldewey <mrskold@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 6:54 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Cc: Ridge, Kristine <kridge@santa-ana.org> Subject: Opposition to 2525 Main Street Development - November 19, 2019 Council Meeting Greetings Mayor and Council, Request for Council Action I oppose the development at 2525 Main Street of the 256 unit multi -family project on the 4.4 acre site with 180 parking spaces on approximately 1.4 acres to be shared by residents and the Discovery Center. I ask that on November 19, 2019, you vote against the four resolutions sought by the developer: including the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR); the Development Agreement; the General Plan Amendment; and the Rezoning Application to allow for the construction in the Professional Zone of a high density multi -family project. I also ask you to take the following steps before the November 19 Council Meeting to ensure the City's development decision is fair to the opponents as well as the developer and proponents of the project. I believe these actions are needed to maintain a transparent process, provide a meaningful opportunity for your constituents to be heard, and develop a complete and accurate record on which to base your decision. Constituents have already made the following requests to the City Attorney, Clerk, and/or City Manager. . Please advise the public of the City's position on the developer's use, if any, of mitigation agreements paying stakeholders, including neighboring property owners, up to $35,000 in return for their public written statement of support for the project and nondisclosure of the existence of the agreement. Is the developer, or any other party, using such agreements in the current project? If so, is the City condoning this practice by permitting letters and other statements of support for the developer to be entered into the public record without requiring that the use of such mitigation agreements or other payments also be disclosed? If you haven't already done so, please look into this community concern, inform the public what you find, and advise whether the City requires that such mitigation and nondisclosure agreements accompany letters of support (or opposition) in the public record. In the current case, It is believed that the nondisclosure requirement applies only to the property owner receiving payment and thus protects only the developer's interests. (See enclosed blank agreement provided by a Park Santiago resident homeowner not a party to such an agreement.) . Please confirm that the information reported in the record in support of the modified plan is current and accurate. Here are some of the issues n the record requiring clarification that have been brought to the City's attention: - the financial benefit now estimated to accrue to the City from this project in terms of average annual revenue and gross general fund revenue may now be substantially less than originally predicted, - the negative impact on traffic safety and parking availability, particularly with the anticipated sale of some of the acreage to the Discovery Center, remains unacceptable or unknown, - the environmental impact of the now approved Main Place Mall is not evaluated, - the mandatory Environmental and Transportation Advisory Committee (ETAC) recommendations to Council to preserve or remove iconic city trees are not included, and - the term/duration of the Development Agreement is not described consistently. . Please adapt the format of the upcoming Council Meeting on this agenda item to allow opponents, as well as the developer, Planning Department, and other proponents, a fair opportunity to be heardl. Specifically, I request that you authorize for all who ask: use of the City or private overhead projector or other audio-visual equipment to present information; • donation of individual 2 minute speaker time to representative speakers so they may speak for 10 or more minutes without interruption; and organization of speakers into groups to allow the coherent presentation of each group's position and supporting information.2 These adaptations should be available to the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA), neighborhood associations, other organizations such as labor unions, as well as other individual speakers on both sides of the issue. I believe these adaptations are essential to allow those on both sides of this complex and contentious issue to be fairly heard, present their ideas and information effectively, and develop a complete and accurate record on which you may base a reasoned and impartial decision. With due respect, I have found the Council's manner of considering the merits of the 2525 Main Street development so far to be exhausting, largely uninformative, and, at times, just plain unfair. These requests have already been made by various constituents to the Council Chair, City Attorney, Clerk, and/or City Manager. Please notify the public as soon as these procedures are put in place so that all will have the opportunity to adequately prepare before the Council Meeting next week. Reasons for Opposition to Current Project/Support for Responsible Development The changes made in this project since the last time the Council considered it are not substantial. Significant problems with this project remain. The people of Santa Ana do not need to settle for this misplaced, high density, outsized housing project. It is not necessary or helpful to your constituents, including those in need of affordable housing, to crowd this space with too many apartment units. The real mistake is abandoning our City's General Plan and haphazardly rezoning piecemeal based on the wants of an individual developer rather than a coherent appraisal of what is in the best interests of the City of Santa Ana. I would like to seek a project for this property that will enhance the cultural uses of the property's neighbors on the North Main Street corridor the revitalized and transformed Main Street Mall, the Bowers Museum, the Santiago Park green spaces, and the Discovery Science Center. This portion of North Main Street should be developed as a premier business location that is part of the exciting and inviting entry to our City already underway, that can be used and enjoyed by all in our City. I greatly appreciate and strongly support the attraction of new development to our City but believe that the adjusted record at 2525 Main Street shows that the financial benefit to the City by this developer in terms of new general fund revenue will be significantly less than originally anticipated. and will not justify the very real harm that the ill conceived and poorly placed development will do to our City. Conclusion In conclusion, I am an individual voter, and home owner who for over twenty years has lived less than a mile away from this proposed development in a neighborhood that will be severely and irreversibly damaged by the decision to rezone and overbuild this parcel of land. I ask you to act in the best interests not only of the surrounding neighborhoods, and of Ward 3, but of our entire City. Together, we can do better. Think of the City's future. Safeguard the fairness, transparency, and integrity of the development review and approval process. Adopt a Council meeting format that is fair to all because it permits the coherent and efficient presentation of the information you need to make a reasoned decision about this matter. Continue to require complete and sound answers to the many important outstanding questions you and your constituents have asked about this proposal. Vote against these resolutions and against this development. Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Mrs. Ellen Koldewey Santa Ana CA 92706 714 785-8029/542-2122 1 As a Ward 3 voter, I rely on Councilmember Solorio and other public officials who have compared the City Council meeting to an evidentiary hearing and stated that the Council's decision is "quasi judicial" in nature. As Councilmember Solorio recently wrote, "I've mentioned this before online and in different neighborhood meetings, but because project and permit approvals like this one are quasi-judicial City Council actions and not legislative actions, we are not supposed to advocate either side. That would be a violation of a fair and due process. Ask our City Attorney or any other City Attorney in the state and they will tell you the same thing. Like judges, we're supposed to be as neutral as possible and only hear information from the hearings and the process and make decisions based on that. During the last Council hearing, I did not vote for 2525 based on the collective information I received and heard" ((J Solorio, Floral Park Next Door, Edited 27 Oct 19) 2 Presently, It is understood that the developer and the Planning Department, have use of the City's overhead projector or other equipment to make audio-visual presentations as well as verbal presentations at the Council meeting. They are given sufficient time to speak in support of their project. In addition, individual development supporters, are given two minutes each to speak. On the other hand, others, including opponents of the project, have been denied the use of audio-visual equipment, and have been informed they are limited to individual two minute presentations. All have access to Ecomment, meetings with, and email to councilmembers. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Nov 19,2019 City Council Meeting From: Gary Thomas <garythomaspaintinR@Rmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 7:35 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.orR>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.orR>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.orR>; Iglesias, Cecilia <CIglesias@santa-ana.orR>; Villegas, Juan <VVileeRas@santa-ana.orR>; City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.orR>; Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.orR>; North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance NSAPA <nsapainfo@Kmail.com>; City Manager <CityManaRer@santa-ana.orR>; policechief@santa-ana.orR; SAPD General Email <sapd@santa-ana.orR>; Rory Kirk <rorykirk@ymail.com> Subject: Nov 19,2019 City Council Meeting Mr.Mayor & Council Members Last time I spoke I ended with a quote "A house divided against itself cannot stand" The City of Santa Ana is divided. Whether it stands rest here with the City,Police Dept and you folks. The destiny of Santa Ana will be be determined and your legacy will be written by listening to neighbors and neighborhoods that make the city. You took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Mr. Mayor and Council Members your decisions for the destiny of Santa Ana must be ased on "We the People". The last Planning Commission Meeting was to listen to and vote on the 2525 N Main Development. The neighbors and neighborhoods of French Park Floral Park,West Floral Park, Wilshire Square,Washington Square,Mulberry Park and Park Santiago spoke.\, "We the People." The spoke with factual information opposing the rezoning. Information showing the short comings and inconsistencies of the developer. The Planning Commission asked questions for clarity and found discrepancies. You know the outcome. 3 Opposed 2 In favor The sad part was Ward 3 representative Kenneth Nguyen appointed by Council Solorio resides in Ward 4. Council Solorio knowingly Failed to have Ward 3 represented. Council Solorio is facing a recall from his Ward. Who on Oct 22 at 1030pm rang my doorbell to hand a plain envelope containing his statement on his recall. Who now is running for mayor. Looking at his political legacy its on of Political Career over Representation. Boasting of accomplishments over having those represented boasting. The BIGGEST REASON I oppose the 2525 Rezoning is for the People of the City of Santa Ana. This is the tip of the ICEBERG for future developments. The destiny of neighbors and neighborhoods whose Quality of life will be Changed and NON REVERSIBLE. Look at sites the sharks will be drawn too. 17th Street from Lincoln to Grand both north&south side. First Street from the 5fwy to the 55fwy. Main Street from Edinger/Dyer to MacArthur to 55fwy. High destiny Housing is NOT THE ANSWER. Santa Ana Pride NEEDS to RETURN. All American city WHERE ALL NATIONALITIES are building a quality life for neighbors & neighborhoods. Education First where neighbors&neighborhoods "We the People" are impacting our city,county,state and America. Building and not taking. A city NOTED for people like Pastor Nati, Former gang member running a non profit. Helping men out of prison build a quality of life for themselves and their families. Impacting their neighborhoods. Who I had work for me in times pass. Robert Palomo A Logan neighbor active with Toys for Tots giving back to neighbors. A successful contractor who specialized in renovating existing apartment complexes for investors. Investors who see the value renovation, neighbors&neighborhoods and cities. Tonight you will be writing the destiny of Santa Ana by your Vote. A public statement to be placed on your legacy of listening to neighbors&neighborhoods "We the People". Neighbors&neighborhoods that define and Make a City. "Its not what your country can do for you. Its what you can do for you country" The developer has been a Used car salesman during the Whole process to neighbors,neighborhoods,Planning Commission,City of Santa Ana and to You Members of the Council.Listen to the voice of "We the People" Cause Santa Ana to be United in Its Destiny Cause Santa Ana to be Known for its Quality of Life Cause Santa Ana to be known as a City of "We the People" Your neighbor, Gary z Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin [mailto:dianefradkin@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:09 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice -The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Importance: High Mayor Pulido: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as the Mayor of the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density protect of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high densitv building or could this be an opportunity to do something better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes....) feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't fin. " Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: ahfuller43@roadrunner.com Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 11:31 AM To: eComment Subject: 2525 Main St Project Councilmembers, I want to oppose the latest proposal for the development of the 5+ acres at 2525 N. Main St. Altho the newest version of building size is reduced but still not to our liking as being so close to a precious neighborhood. My objections are as follows: 1. The project is still too dense and high in height and encroaches on the entrance to Santiago Park. 2. Because the entrance to this apartment complex is so close to the park access, it is suggested to redraw the intersection to Walkie Way which would make the pedestrian access very dangerous and confusing to use. 3. The "proposed" sale of a portion of this property to the Discovery Science Center for their much needed parking, makes an entrance to this parking lot too close to Edgewood Road, 1-5 North offramp AND the most impossible access to vehicles heading south on Main St. It would require those vehicles to make a U-turn at the Edgewood Rd. traffic light and immediately pull into parking lot at such a short distance from the intersection. (Not to mention the shortened left -turn pocket due to the jogged intersection at Walkie Way) 4. The impact of this increased and confused traffic at a complex and busy main corridor for our city is potentially multiplying total gridlock. This is not the proper use of this property and should not be rezoned for any residential use. It should stay commercial! The Discovery Science Center should buy this 5+ acres and expand their administration and/or museum space and also use this for parking. This science center is a wonderful addition to our museum district. Sincerely, Marilyn Fuller 2422 Santiago 714 834-9073 Sent from my iPad Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Please Say NO to 2525 North Main Street From: mary geesman [mailto:mgeesman@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:02 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <VVileegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <CIglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please Say NO to 2525 North Main Street Mayor and Councilmembers, Please vote no on the project at 2525 N Main. This is the wrong place to build this project. The traffic on Main is already horrendous during peak commute times and once the 1900 apartment units are completed in the Main Place Mall it will be even worse. Drivers will seek alternate routes through the neighborhood to avoid the Main & freeway ramp traffic. As a resident on Santa Clara, I already see this happening and I am really worried about all the extra apartment traffic. Another 544 plus cars will just make it that much worse. I am not against more housing; I am against housing being built in a poor location that will have a detrimental affect on the surrounding neighborhoods. I have lived in the neighborhood for over forty years and am proud of my neighbors coming together to oppose this project. Please listen to the residents of the area and not to the promises of the project developer. Mary Geesman t Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 main st I oppose ----Original Message ----- From: Edwin Garrido [mailto:edwingarridojr@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 12:39 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 main st I oppose I oppose rezoning of this address no hi density apartments. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Bill B <billbonnett@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:38 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: Opposed to the proposed revised 2525 Main St Residential Apartment Complex Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, I am writing to oppose the 2525 Main St. residential development. I ask you to put Santa Ana Residents first and vote Against this project. Why do I oppose this project: 1.2525 Main St is an excellent location for continued Professional Office Use. It has been the location of a Fortune 100 Company, Wells Fargo, since the mid 1980's. Wells Fargo chose to moves its operations to Chandler, AZ, not because 2525 was a bad location, but because AZ offered them incentives to do so. 2525 works well as a Professional office site. 2. There is more than sufficient high density luxury apartments in the immediate area. As you know, 1,900 Luxury apartments have been approved for Main Place Mall, less than 1/2 mile away. 3. The City's street at Main/Edgewood simply can not adequately handle the additional traffic that will be created by the already approved luxury apartment units in the immediate area. Office traffic is non existent on weekends, holidays, and after 7 pm weekdays. 4. 2525 Main St is not a good location for Apartment Units, as it is within 500 feet of the very congested and pollution from the 5 freeway. Many large air quality boards advise AGAINST building residential units within 500 feet of a freeway due to the very poor air quality. Having apartment residents outside, in their amenity areas, including pools, decks, BBQ's areas, patios etc, while breathing the unhealthy fumes from the 5 freeway is irresponsible and unethical, knowing what we ALL know now, about building residences next to freeways. 5. Santa Ana needs to maintain 2525 Main St as a Business location for the thousands of new residents coming to all the new apartments in Santa Ana. We should be supporting local jobs sites for our residences, instead of making them drive to cities like Irvine, to work in a new office building and for a desirable employer. We must do better than simply continuously approving High Density Apartments, Starbucks, and fast food restaurants in our City. 6. Our General Plan should not continue to be violated with Zoning Changes and Amendments, when the current use of the parcel is strong and viable. This site would continue to make an excellent business location. It simply was not marketed to business, users, but rather sold to the highest bidder, which was a High Density apartment developer. 7. Santa Ana needs to attract the next generation of professional works with new office buildings, so that they will want to buy houses here and start families here. 8. Santa Ana is out of balance in regards to the new real estate products they are approving. High Density apartments need to be built ALONG with new office buildings, retail, industrial, medical, governmental and recreational. Santa Ana has stepped up already and approved and built thousands and thousands of Luxury Apartments in this area. Santa Ana needs to approve a more balanced mix of real estate development. 9. Building High Density without an appropriate buffer from the abutting low density housing leads to a lower quality of life, due to increased traffic, crowding, and decreased overall safety. Cut thru traffic will drastically increase in the abutting single family neighborhood as our primary arteries are already clogged with traffic in this area. 10. Santa Ana can do better than yet more High Density Luxury Apartments on our primary business corridor. We have a chance to build something that we can be proud of and that Santa Ana residents can more directly benefit from. Once yet another High Density Apartment Complex wipes out another business location, Santa Ana residents are worse off since they now have to travel farther for employment. Its time to support new Local Jobs for Santa Ana residents. Thank you in advance for putting Santa Ana Residents First and Voting No on this proposed project. Santa Ana can do much better for its residents at this location. Sincerely, Bill Bonnett 15 year Park Santiago Resident. Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: No to apartments at 2525 N Main From: Family [mailto:familialopez02@att.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 2:00 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: No to apartments at 2525 N Main Good Afternoon, I am writing on behalf of my family in opposition of the proposed apartment complex to be built at 2525 N. Main St. The project is too dense for the area. There already is heavy traffic on that stretch of Main due to it being a major street which is heavily used in a daily basis as well as an access point to the freeways. Aside from that, the grandiose project at the main place mall (hotels, apartments, etc) is going to be built also which will only add to the already existing congestion in the area. Edgewood is an access point to our beautiful neighborhood, which you may not reside in. Having to share the access with hundreds or thousands more will make it harder for Park Santiago residents to enter/exit the Area. Other issues may include traffic collisions (which already occur when vehicles turn on red at off ramp), apartment residents (on contract and subleasing) and their visitors will spill over and park in the neighborhood streets making it hard for our residents and visitors to find parking. The parking on residential streets will then cost Park Santiago residents money. We will have to make our residential streets parking permit only streets costing our residents money in order to park on our streets as well as the inconvenience of having to fill out parking permits (limited) for our visitors. Quality of life, safety, and great property value was something i strived for and looked for when buying a home to raise my family. Which is why my husband and I (both born and raised in Santa Ana) decided to purchase in the Park Santiago neighborhood. This may not be of importance to you since you do not reside in out neighborhood. I did not want to live in an area surrounded by apartment buildings or on a street where we had to fight/struggle to park on. Santa Ana streets are supposed to be tree -lined not car lined. As lifelong Santaneros, we have worked hard to provide our children with a nice home in a great neighborhood. It's easy for some city employees/officials to support a project when it does not directly affect them. I am going to boldly assume that this project would no longer be proposed if it was going to affect the Floral Park neighborhood. How would you feel if an apartment complex was going to be built in your backyard? The Lopez Sent from my iPhone Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 Main From: DAN KENT DE VOL [mailto:devol dan@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:45 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main The mayor and members of the Santa Ana City Council: I have been a resident of Park Santiago since 1952. I believe its reputation as a well kept and respected area benefits the city. Many people over the years have remarked on the homes in Washington Square, Fisher Park, West Floral Park, Park Santiago, French Park and others in the area as gems that honor our city's image. They are a mixture of tract and custom homes built in the last 100 years. Many cities are fortunate to have these beautiful neighborhoods. Neighborhoods that have survived the passage of time and have helped establish the character of their communities. If you can protect the Park Santiago neighborhood from poor, hasty urban planning that will reduce this long standing quality of life that now exists in our neighborhood then you, the city council members will save this very treasured area from the eventual downgrade that high density and overcrowded conditions bring. Re zoning will be the turn of the corner that will downturn the quality of life that is lived here. This tower will be a gate way to the eventually loss of this community. A legacy that belongs to our children and their children and the future generations that will reside here in beautiful Santa Ana. I ask you please not to vote for re zoning this area. I ask you to protect this area for Santa Ana's future. Sincerely, Dan De Vol Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Alan Fuller <alan.fuller@live.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:56 PM To: eComment Subject: Opposed to 2525 Main St Project Regarding 2525 North Main Street, Santa Ana, Ca November 13, 2019 City Council Members: I strongly opposed the proposed high density development at the entrance to the Park Santiago neighborhood Almost 2 years ago, when development was first proposed, the neighborhood in turned out and indicated a development at this location would be a mistake. It would still be a mistake. We are a neighborhood of single family, mainly one story homes. The development is not compatible with the character of the area. The best use for this property would be for offices and parking for the Discovery Science Center A development like "Avery at the Grove" on Santa Clara across from Fairhaven Cemetery would more appropriate. The Grove property is approximately the same size and will have 22 single family homes, not hundreds of apartments. In objecting, the obvious reason is the size and density of the development. Nearly 260 apartments next to a 1200 home neighborhood is excessive. If it is to be rezoned, the density should be a maximum of 20 units per acre, not the 58 upa as proposed. A development like the homes along Memory Lane(City Place), which are only three stories, is more appropriate. The development and the new parking lot entrance is too close to the 5 freeway exit. The construction on the freeway to allow even more traffic at the exit and intersection points to even more traffic at an unsafe location. I live in this100 year old neighborhood. It should continue to be preserved, guarded and protected. Apartments, in a residential neighborhood, do not enhance the neighborhood, they erode it. Apartments will bring on -street parking issues, congestion and cut -through traffic. This property should not be re -zoned by a developer that will surely sell the property if entitlements are approved and leave the city council and the neighbors to deal with the negative issues that develop. Sincerely, Alan H Fuller 2422 Santiago Santa Ana, CA t Mitre -Ramirez, Norma To: Houston, Nicole Subject: RE: Rezoning -----Original Message ----- From: Bill Gallivan [mailto:goeasybill@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 4:53 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Rezoning I am opposed to rezoning of 2525 N Main Street. This sets a bad precedent for future development not in compliance with the city master plan . William Gallivan Sr Nancy J Gallivan Sent from my iPhone Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Proposed 2525 Main St. From: Art V [mailto:huggysdad@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 4:36 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Proposed 2525 Main St. Dear Mayor Pulido, I am not against development, this project is not congruent with good planning. There is no buffer between the high density project and the low density neighborhood. Please listen to our neighbors and Vote against this project and the zoning change. Thanks, Art & Wendy Valenzuela Fairmont Ave. Santa Ana Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: 2525 Main Street From: John [mailto:laab@roadrunner.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:32 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Dear Miguel, The proposed development at 2525 Main Street is a bad idea. You guys just approved 1,900 Apartment Units to be built at the Main Place Mall which the infrastructure is ill equipped to handle. Please Vote "no" on the 2525 Main street development. John and Blanche Barneich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Dea r M i Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: The Addington at 2525 N Main Street -----Original Message ----- From: Lewis Wood [mailto:lewis2522@me.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:16 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa- ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Cc: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Subject: The Addington at 2525 N Main Street Dear Mayor and City Council We have been residents of Santa Ana since the early 1980's. We moved to Park Santiago in 1992. 1 was once the President of the Association and I was also instrumental in the improvements that took place in Santiago Park. As an architect, I volunteered and led neighborhood efforts and gathered a team of design professional to develop a concept plan for the park. Some of the ideas we developed were implemented. The new play area, the nature trails and the bridge across the creek are some of those. We have lived and supported this neighborhood for many years. As you know my wife and I continue to support the development at 2525 N Main Street. I wanted to share our views, some which you have read before: 1. We believe that the development will increase property values in our neighborhood. Increased density can result in new businesses that can make this a more walkable City. Density will bring greater demand for our neighborhood homes as places to live while commuting to nearby businesses. Density will encourage business growth and development that will enliven Main Street. Density will increase the availability of the area to be enjoyed by all the citizens of Santa Ana. 2. The Main Place redevelopment would be supported by the residents of The Addington and the other developments that are under constriction. The health of Main Street businesses will occur with substantial amount of density growth. That is what other cities have experienced. Santa Ana should benefit from such growth the same as our neighboring cities benefit. 3. The new changes The Addington has made essentially makes this development a Main Street development and not part of the neighborhood. The parking lots between the development and the neighborhood effectively divorce the development from the neighborhood. This development is as much a part of Main Street as is the Discovery Museum and for that matter the 5 freeway. This has to do with Main Street health and not neighborhood health. And it has to do with citywide health. The argument about cars and noise is no different than arguing that the 5 freeway should be moved. This is an urban city and this is what comes with healthy urban growth. Or else the city dies like many cities have across this nation. 4. We should have a vision for Main Street as one of the highlights of Santa Ana City life. This street should be vibrant attracting growth and people from all around. We should not sit back while the rest of Orange County moves forward with urban growth. There are many cities that just become a past through for people going somewhere but not the dead zone they drive through. We should make sure we are a destination where people come to live, work and spend their money. We encourage the council to approve The Addington as a starting point for a renewed effort to reinvigorate Main Street Santa Ana. Leave a legacy behind as the ones that renewed Santa Ana's efforts to be a place and not a pass through. Sincerely Lewis and Jeanette Wood Park Santiago 2525 N Poinsettia Street Santa Ana CA92706 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma To: Houston, Nicole Subject: RE: 2525 N. Main Street -----Original Message ----- From: George Britton [mailto:gebrittonjr@icloud.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:05 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street Honorable Mayor Pulido, Please vote against the proposed development at 2525 N. Main Street. Thank you! Sent from my iPhone Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Proposed Development at Main and Santa Clara From: Dennis Parrett [mailto:dparrett@cox.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 4:22 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Proposed Development at Main and Santa Clara Dear Member, Park Santiago is one of the nicest neighborhoods in Santa Ana. It still can be if you will veto the proposed monstrosity at Main and Santa Clara. It appears to be a developer's wet dream project and a nightmare for the neighborhood. There may be places in Santa Ana where this oversze project would fit; this location isn't one of them. To protect the Park Santiago neighborhood property values, avoid unnecessary traffic and looming presence of an overbuilt project, please require a MAJOR scaleback of the development. Dennis and Mae Parrett, Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Rezoning On Nov 13, 2019, at 7:52 PM, Bill Gallivan <goeasybillgaol.com> wrote: I am opposed to rezoning of 2525 N Main Street. This sets a bad precedent for future development not in compliance with the city master plan. William Gallivan Sr Nancy J Gallivan Sent from my iPhone Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: RE: Proposed Development at Main and Santa Clara On Nov 13, 2019, at 7:21 PM, Dennis Parrett <dparrett@cox.net> wrote: Dear Member, Park Santiago is one of the nicest neighborhoods in Santa Ana. It still can be if you will veto the proposed monstrosity at Main and Santa Clara. It appears to be a developer's wet dream project and a nightmare for the neighborhood. There may be places in Santa Ana where this oversze project would fit; this location isn't one of them. To protect the Park Santiago neighborhood property values, avoid unnecessary traffic and looming presence of an overbuilt project, please require a MAJOR scaleback of the development. Dennis and Mae Parrett, Salas, Diana From: Genelle Johnson <genellejohnson@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 10:20 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Penaloza, David; Villegas, Juan; Sarmiento, Vicente; Iglesias, Cecilia; Solorio, Jose; eComment; pbacerra@santa-ana.org Subject: NO On 2525 Main!!! Mayor and City Council, Please vote NO on the proposed development at 2525 N Main St. The Planning Commission that you appoint has voted it down TWICE. PLEASE follow the Planning Commission's recommendation and vote NO on this project so that a suitable project that is inline with the current zoning can be implemented. It is NOT the council's responsibility to find a solution to the developer's purchase of a property that is not zoned for his desired use. Thank you, Genelle Johnson 2545 Santiago St, Santa Ana, CA 92706 (Park Santiago) Salas, Diana From: Kelaher, Selena Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:38 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525North Main Street Selena Kelaher, AICP City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency I M20 20 Civic Center Plaza I Post Office Box 1988 1 Santa Ana, CA 92702 skelaher@santa-ana.org I Direct Phone: (714) 667- 2740 -----Original Message ----- From: Mark Rothenberg [mailto:markllaa@me.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 7:33 AM To: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525North Main Street Selena Good morning. By this email, I am re -stating and re -incorporating my ongoing objection to the project. The reduction in density and design changes do not change my prior analysis. By way of example, the project constitutes unlawful spot zoning without a compelling public policy justification and should therefore be rejected. Moreover, the City should not entertain a General Plan amendment unless and until the entire General Plan has been fully updated. Kindly log my objections for the City Council. Many Thanks, Mark A. Rothenberg, Esq. Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:08 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston ] Executive Assistant City Manager's Officel nhouston(@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Sandy DeAngelis[mailto:sandytdeangelis@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 11:28 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Dear City Council Members, I am a long time resident of Floral Park and I vote in every election. As a realtor, I do understand the need for housing, but I must appeal to you to vote against the 2525 Main Street project. This project is bad for the City and bad for Park Santiago Neighborhood and bad for the entire North end of Santa Ana. As you are aware, Floral Park strongly opposes this project and many neighbors plan to attend the 11/19/19 Tuesday night meeting of the City Council to express our dissent. We know that backing up rental units to an established vintage neighborhood is a bad idea in all respects. Rezoning of the property is unacceptable. I am asking you to vote against the project. Your constitutions will definitely take your vote under consideration the next time they vote. Thank you. Sandy DeAngelis Salas, Diana From: Lynne Sturdivant <Izwickl@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:14 AM To: mpulido@danta-ana.org; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan; eComment; Iglesias, Cecilia Subject: 2525 Main Street Rezoning and Residential Development PROPOSAL Honored Council Members, I am writing you today to continue to show support AGAINST the proposed rezoning and high -density apartment complex that developers are trying to force upon our neighborhood and city. This area, 2525 Main Street, is currently zoned commercial, which it should retain. With approximately 10,000 beds being added within 1/2 mile of this location, the greater need is commercial property with industry to employ residents. The developer has said, "they didn't know about the development in and around Main Place Mall" when they submitted their plans, well now they do. Adding a high-rise, high -density, apartment complex in people's back yards is beyond the scope of our general plan, is a huge breach of privacy to residents, and a complete disregard for the quality of life for the residents in that general area. The developer is quick to add that with the addition of the approximately 10,000 beds and their proposed high -density apartment complex, there will be no negative effect on the flow of traffic or the cut-thru traffic to Park Santiago. This is completely false and goes against every true study conducted on traffic. To say that no-one will cut thru Park Santiago to get to the new housing, is ludicrous. To propose that every resident will only use one entrance on Main Street is both short sided and offensive. The developer seems to be operating on the fact that we as home owners do not have the general cognitive ability to understand what would happen with the increase in residents. The developer has changed the name of the project, submitted plans prior to the neighborhood discussion they promised, and has shown a general disregard for the quality of life in and around Park Santiago. The developer has not operated in good faith, and continues to use a good offense (by attacking our neighborhood with false claims) as a means of putting forth a strong defense of their position. It appears the developer is pushing hard, as they purchased a piece of property NOT zoned for their intended project, at a very high price, and now are pulling out all the stops to ram their inappropriate project down our throats. They have made minor changes, which do not change the fact that this area is zoned for commercial and not high -density apartments, with inadequate parking, traffic flow, and complete disregard for the single family homes in direct line -of -site of this project. They have tried to divide our neighborhood by offering sweetheart deals to adjacent property owners and have used strong arm tactics at Council Meetings. A best use of the current area is to retain the current zoning, work diligently to obtain commercial vendors who could offer employment, office space, and support for the influx of residents coming to this general area. With approved plans for the upgrade to Main Place Mall, the current apartments being built or completed, and the new ones slated within 1/2 mile, the area will be dense with homeowners, and greatly lacking in opportunities for employment. I implore you to vote the voice of your constituents. There is a small, and curiously funded and supported group, who seem to know what is best for those of us living in Park Santiago and the surrounding area. We, the residents of Park Santiago and Floral Park are vehemently opposed to the rezoning and high -density apartments in this area. Nowhere else in Santa Ana are there high -density apartments of this size directly adjacent to single family home neighborhoods. This would be the highest density in this type of area. This proposal is in direct conflict with Santa Ana's general plan. Finally, there are approximately 10,000 beds added or being added within 1/2 mile of 2525 Main. This area CANNOT support the addition of more apartments, more traffic, and the loss of commercial real estate. The parking, as submitted on the plans by the developer, is woefully inadequate, which would also mean spill over into Park Santiago, which would create another hardship on our neighborhood. Reserving parking spots for the Discovery Cube is a curious marriage that seems like a quid pro quo arrangement. Thank you for voting NO on 2525. The Planning Committee has voted NO and I implore you to follow the lead of the individuals you placed on the Commission. I implore you to listen to your constituents and vote as our voice, the voice that elected you to office to speak for us on the Council. Thank you for your time and attention to this pressing matter. I'm hopeful tomorrow you will send the message that rezoning and high -density apartments are not the right fit for 2525 Main Street and the City of Santa Ana. Have a great day! Lynne Zwickl Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:27 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: JUST SAY NO Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office nhoustonralsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 r� 2020+ j SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Cathy Morehead [mailto:moreheadc@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 10:24 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: JUST SAY NO Dear Miguel, just say NO to 2525 you know all the reasons why. I have supported you for many years with my ballot, please support the residents of Park Santiago and do not approve this project. Thank you in advance :) Cathy Cathy Morehead + Associates C. 714-381-3340 www.CathyMorehead.com 1 Salas, Diana From Sent: Houston, Nicole To: Monday, November 78, 2019 8:27 AM Subject: eComment FW: 2525 Main Development Proposal Kind Regards, Nicole Houston 1 Executive Assistant City Manager's office 1111 on(a�sa`o� 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 12020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Stephen Hryniewicki [mailto:shryniewicki@live.com] Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 11:00 AM To: Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.or >; <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.or > Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> g , Villegas, Juan <JVille asg Penaloza, David Subject: 2525 Main Development Proposal g @santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, I am writing to all of you to encourage you to vote NO regarding the development at 2525 Main Street. The location of this building will have a significant detrimental effect on the surrounding neighborhood. Apartment buildings such as this will cause irreparable damage to the adjoining neighborhood and the surrounding areas. I appreciate the need for more housing, but this is not a way to solve this concern. Your consideration is greatly appreciated and again I urge you to vote NO! STEPHEN HRYNIEWICKI, MD 2010 N. VICTORIA DR Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:28 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Residential Project (proposed in a currently commercially zoned are) Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Stephanie Ochoa [mailto:sochoa_mcdaniel@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 10:58 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; jvillegas@santa-ana.irg; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Dale Helvig <dale.helvig@gmail.com>; stephanie ochoa Mcdaniel <sochoa_mcda n iel @ya hoo.com> Subject: 2525 Main Residential Project (proposed in a currently commercially zoned are) The games and manipulations during this process are shameful. The roman Reyna fraudulent disaster and police union strong-arming (dark money) antics are shameful. Attempting to railroad our community for who knows what kind of dark benefit to those not in our neighborhood is shameful. History of illegal activities in Santa Ana is shameful. Perhaps you choose to break the shameful cycle is in-house favoritism and listen to your residents. Welcome to Phil Bacerra who should have held that seat in the first place. No on the 2525 Main Street project. Regards, Stephanie (Ochoa) McDaniel, M.P.P., Paralegal 714.276.4633 https://stephaniemcd.myrandf.com Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:28 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main Street - Is this project going to create a Public Safety issue??7 Attachments: 2525 N Main Revised project access.pdf Importance: High Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office nhoustom?@santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Diane Fradkin[mailto:dianefradkin@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 1:15 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa- ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbaccera@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 N. Main Street - Is this project going to create a Public Safety issue??? Importance: High Good Afternoon Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers: The Staff Report package, which was made available by the Planning Department yesterday November 15th, has 4 sections. The proposed project details are located in the last section..... section 4. I'd like for you to focus on the revised site plan ..... one item which jumps out has to do with site access (see attachment) including the new off -set intersection and new curb cut/traffic circulation/traffic study. This new redesign includes these items below (but are certainly not limited to Just these items): 1) The off -set intersection at Walkie Way & Main Street 2) North & South left turn turn -pockets at Walkie Way & Main Street (and reconfiguration of left turn pocket from Main Street onto Edgewood) 3) The new curb cut on Main Street closer to Edgewood 4) Surface parking for Discovery Center patrons These 4 items above were not included in the original DEIR as they are new to the project. They have not been subjected to the 45 day public review process per CEOA since they were not included in the original DEIR. This could result in a legal issue for the City having an inadequate EIR for this project. However, the bigger issue from these redesign items have to do with Public Safety. The close proximity of 7 traffic lights along the stretch of Main Street from Edgewood to La Veta could pose a significant issue with Fire and Police during certain high peak traffic times. Also, the stacking when cars are trying to turn left into the proposed project, Discovery Center or into Park Santiago neighborhood will be an issue due to the staggered intersection at Walkie Way which will cause a back up on both sides of Main Street during high peak traffic times due to the short left turn pockets. The park access for Santiago Park is through the entrance of the proposed project.... this is another cause for concern as it will be confusing for drivers trying to access the park. Children visiting the Discovery Center will need to cross Main Street if parking across from the Discovery Center and due to the off -set intersection and cross walk, there may be a safety issue when crossing Main Street because of this off -set intersection. And lastly, the new curb cut closer to Edgewood and the northbound 5 Fwy off ramp will absolutely cause issues as cars will either block the intersection and/or create tremendous back up ...... again, causing a Public Safety concern. Common sense tells you that once again, the revised project is being shoe -horned into a location that can not physically accommodate the project. Again, the correct conclusion is that something better needs to be considered for this site ..... don't justsettle for less because its easy and you feel sorry for the applicant! On Tuesday, please vote Noon the revised project ..... we all can do better) I Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 Year Santa Ana Resident 714-914-8047 Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:29 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Apartments At 2525 Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: CLAY HENDERSON fmailto:plumblinel@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 9:56 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Apartments At 2525 Main My Wife and I are against any type of apartments at this site. We would welcome new nabor,s who had a stake in the nabor hood. Build 42 new HOMES we will welcome them as new nabors. Or leave the zoning the way it is. We moved to Park Santiago in 1993. Sent from my iPhone Clay & Sunny Henderson 2332 Oakmont Ave 714 800-3600 Plumbiinel@sbcglobal.net Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:29 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 North Main VOTE NO Kind Regards, Nicole Houston i Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonPsanta-ana.orz 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 � 2 0 2 0 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: J L [mailto:jeff92706@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 2:59 PM To: Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <1Villegas@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 North Main VOTE NO Hello, It is entirely wrong to punish an entire neighborhood, Park Santiago, with development so large as the one proposed. It will negatively impact our neighborhood. Please vote NO on the proposed stack and pack apartments at 2525, especially since you approved the 1900 unit development at Main Place. Look what poor decisions did to Historic French Park. DIsastrous! Sincerely, Jeff Level Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:30 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office nhouston(@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza [Santa Ana, CA 92701 t2020l a, [ SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Sandy DeAngelis[mailto:sandytdeangelis@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 11:28 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Dear City Council Members, I am a long time resident of Floral Park and I vote in every election. As a realtor, I do understand the need for housing, but I must appeal to you to vote against the 2525 Main Street project. This project is bad for the City and bad for Park Santiago Neighborhood and bad for the entire North end of Santa Ana. As you are aware, Floral Park strongly opposes this project and many neighbors plan to attend the 11/19/19 Tuesday night meeting of the City Council to express our dissent. We know that backing up rental units to an established vintage neighborhood is a bad idea in all respects. Rezoning of the property is unacceptable. I am asking you to vote against the project. Your constitutions will definitely take your vote under consideration the next time they vote. Thank you. Sandy DeAngelis Santa Ana City Council, R Elected officials should represent our great city and be the O voice of their constituents. R Y I have three simple points. (1) I'm puzzled as to why any council member would be in K favor of apartments at 2525 Main Street. Over 99% of the Park Santiago Neighborhood, including Floral Park, West R Floral Park, French Park, Washington Square, Fisher Park, K Morrison Park, Santa Ana Historical committee and countless others, that are overwhelmingly opposed to this project. (2) Many residents have made these nostalgic neighborhoods gems by making their homes here, some over 40 or more years. We are committed and rooted in Santa Ana for a very long time if not a life time and support responsible development. Santa Ana is not home to this developer, and the only reason for him being here is financial gain. (3) Denying the developer a zoning change and this ill conceived project that has had countless changes, could benefit the city and other developers for future acquisitions. This has put City Council the Planning Commission and the neighborhood in the crossfire and a very awkward position. Rory Kirk rorykirk@ymail.com 714-925-4555 2429 North French Street Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:31 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 North Main Residential Development Vote Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office] nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza SSanta Ana, CA 92701 LJ 2020, I SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Mike Wood [mailto:midewo@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:31 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 North Main Residential Development Vote Santa Ana city council person, Act responsibly, and follow your planning commission's recommendation. Do not approve this project in its current state. sell out my historic neighborhood and i and my fellow PSNA neighbors will actively fight this poorly planned proposal for as long as it takes. the video, says it all... htti)s://Www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeNA4R3Xb9E no reply is necessary.... a very concerned PSNA resident Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:32 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: No Apartments Please Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonPsanta-ana.or¢ 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 u�E 2020 U(JII l.,) SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Joe Vickers [mailto:vickers.joe@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2019 7:37 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPena loza@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org> Subject: No Apartments Please Dear Mayor Pulido and Council Members , We are writing this email to voice our opposition to the 2525 N. Main Street Residential Development We have been home owners in Park Santiago for almost 7 years. We truly love our neighborhood - it is a gem in Orange County, filled with historic homes and, most importantly, an amazing sense of community. We are thankful to be raising our three young children in this neighborhood. We strongly oppose the rezoning of 2525 N. Main Street, as well as any general plan amendment. Our concerns include the density of the proposed apartments, and the significant impact on traffic and the environment. The current zoning of a professional building is an important buffer between the neighborhood and Main Street, and also provides a location for professional job opportunities for Santa Ana residents. Thank you for taking the time to read this email. We appreciate your work. Sincerely, Joe and Karla Vickers Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:32 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N Spurgeon St Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston ] Executive Assistant City Manager's Office] nhouston2santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Sam Sanchez [mailto:ssanchezg@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2019 5:42 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N Spurgeon St Project Dear Mayor Pulido and City Council, My name is Sam Sanchez. I live at 2542 N Spurgeon St, Santa Ana, CA 92706. 1 have lived here since April of 2013. My parents and 2 brothers each also own homes here in Santiago Park (4 total). My parents and family moved to this area in 2001 and have been residents since. I moved away in 2005 to the SF Bay area after college and moved back in 2009 and came back to Santiago Park. My family having lived here all this time. It really is one of the best neighborhoods I've been at, and I've lived in many places. I am writing to you to express my opposition to the Apartment complex proposal on 2525 N. Spurgeon St. The developers have been nothing but selfish, making plans to support their own agenda of building the biggest and most dense project for their profit. The fact that they bought this zone knowing it's zoning, and then trying to simply swap it speaks to their nature. The mention that they would give reparations to the residents directly affected, and then ask us to sign an agreement in favor of OR neutral stance to the project in order to obtain $35k for home reparations. Let's be honest, in your eyes, a vote from us of Yes or Neutral would mean 'yes' in your eyes. I drive around the neighborhood and see nothing but dense buildings being built. As I write this, there are 3... THREE... huge apartment complexes being built right in our neighborhood (Memory Lane, Town & Country), along with another huge set over by Main Place Mall set in the future. The location of this building really affects all of the single family homes. Long standing residents move to this area and neighborhood because they want to raise their families here. Because of the quiet nature and suburban single family area. They do not move here to be next to a huge apartment complex, which will cause parking issues in our area and a lot more traffic throughout the day and weekends, vs just on weekdays with a commercial building. fWhich is the current zoning. While I don't like all of the apartments, I do realize that they are being built in an area that everyone is happy with. I have spoken to one of you, and they even have seen my backyard. Needless to say, they clearly saw the huge impact, first hand, this would make to the residents. I still support the current zoning. How about making a great office space, such as like wework.com, where Center. Since we have quite can rent space for ea saturation of apartment ork space, presentations, conferences, why not provide them seven omewhere to work? lks for the Discovery Santa Ana is becoming way too crowded with these huge developments. If we allow projects like this to happen, then we will soon lose the long standing residents that continue to fight for Santa Ana as being a great city. I went to school in Irvine, and worked in Newport Beach. People don't have a good opinion of our city. Apartment residents are not permanent residents. I was born and raised here, went through our public schools, and participated in our sports programs. I have been a proud Santa Ana Resident and hope you can see what we see and vote NO to residential apartments. If you still want to build residential, then how about something more permanent. Condos or more single-family homes. That, I would support. I want our community to stay a community and have great value. More permanent residents would fit in with this neighborhood. Thank you for taking the time to listen to a long standing Santa Ana Santiago Park Resident. Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:28 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Craig Kalthoff [mailto:craigekalthoff@cox.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:19 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Good morning. I am the treasurer of Floral Park neighborhood association. I would ask that you vote against 2525 project. I think it's been documented that this will affect property values immensely, affect traffic flow around the surrounding area especially through Floral Park where there is already a traffic problem. Please take heed over the planning commission desire not to support this project as well Craig Kalthoff 2510 North Park Blvd Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:28 AM To: 'Craig Kalthoff' Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Mr. Kalthoff, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 1 dperez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Craig Kalthoff <craigekalthoff@cox.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:19 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Good morning. I am the treasurer of Floral Park neighborhood association. I would ask that you vote against 2525 project. I think it's been documented that this will affect property values immensely, affect traffic flow around the surrounding area especially through Floral Park where there is already a traffic problem. Please take heed over the planning commission desire not to support this project as well Craig Kalthoff 2510 North Park Blvd Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhoustong@santa-ana.org 714,647,5200 I20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 M 2020. L- SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Stephen Amsler [mailto:samsler@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:33 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Project Hello, I'm opposed to the 2525 Main Residential Development project. Please vote against it on Tuesday. Stephen Amsler 1904 N. Flower St, Santa Ana, CA 92706 1 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:39 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO! Kind Regards, Nicole Houston j Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Taylor, Summer Imailto:sumtaylor@deloitte.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:38 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO! Dear Council Members, I understand you will be voting on the 2525 Project this Tuesday. I am a life long Santa Ana resident, having grown up and owned a home in Park Santiago, and currently own a home in Floral Park. My retired parents also own a home in Park Santiago. I urge you to preserve these historic neighborhoods and the single family residential home values by VOTING AGAINST THE 2525 PROJECT. The city has numerous multi -family and mixed use projects that have already been approved, including the development of residences at Main Place Mall. Furthermore, the city of Orange has approved similar projects in the Main Street area. The 2525 Project will reduce property values for Park Santiago home owners and neighboring communities, increase traffic congestion even further, and will not be beneficial to the city long term. I understand the developer has offered re-election funds and financial compensation to certain residents to support the project. I can assure you that the collective communities of Park Santiago and Floral Park will not support the re- election of any council member that votes in favor of this project. These are two unique and historic neighborhoods which have benefited from your collective efforts to improve our city, resulting in significantly higher property values over the last 10-20 years. I urge the council to not take a step that will undo those efforts. Respectfully yours, Summer Taylor 2204 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92706 This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited. Deloitte refers to a Deloitte member firm, one of its related entities, or Deloitte Touche Tobmatsu Limited ("DTTL"). Each Deloitte member firm is a separate legal entity and a member of DTTL. DTTL does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more. v.E.l Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:51 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote to Reject the 2525 N Main Street Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Santiago Martin [mailto:samartint@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:49 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote to Reject the 2525 N Main Street Project Please vote to Reject the 2525 Main Street project Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:51 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston i Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.orx 714.647,5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020# SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: GEORGE KOPYLOW [mailto:gkopylow@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:43 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Please reject this project!!!!!!!! Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:56 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote NO on 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza JSanta Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Nanci Zinngrabe [mailto:zcasasucasa@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:55 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO on 2525 Main Street Please vote NO on 2525 Moan street! Thank you! Nanci Zinngrabe Sent from my Whone Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:18 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main St Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sendervia reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: linda salata imailto:salata7@sbcgloba1.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:18 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St Project Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street Project! Thank you! The Salata's 2115 N Heliotrope Dr Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:22 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Project. Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston[casanta-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza JSanta Ana, CA 92701 w C d 2C20` SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Sonja Garner [mailto:salgar@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:22 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project. I am against this project. It is too big of a project to an already busy area of the city! Sonja Gamer Sent from AOL Mobile Mail 1 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:24 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 20L0 SANTA AMA COUNTS, This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Taylor, Summer [mailto:sumtaylor@deloitte.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:49 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO Dear Mayor Pulido, Thank you for visiting the FPNA meeting last week and discussing this project. I appreciate you taking the time to meet with us. I understand you will be voting on the 2525 Project this Tuesday. I am a lifelong Santa Ana resident, having grown up and owned a home in Park Santiago, and currently own a home in Floral Park. My retired parents also own a home in Park Santiago. I urge you and the council to preserve these historic neighborhoods and the single family residential home values by VOTING AGAINST THE 2525 PROJECT. I have shared my concerns with all council members individually, and hope that the collective voices of Park Santiago and Floral Park will be heard and respected at the meeting tomorrow. I appreciate all your efforts to make Santa Ana a wonderful place to call home. Respectfully yours, Summer Taylor 2204 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92706 This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited. Deloitte refers to a Deloitte member firm, one of its related entities, or Deloitte Touche Tobmatsu Limited ("DTTL"). Each Deloitte member firm is a separate legal entity and a member of DTTL. DTTL does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more. v.E.I Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:25 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: YES on the Addington Project (2525 Main Street) Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonPsanta-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020, SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Jun Tanega imailto:jtanega69@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:01 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: YES on the Addington Project (2525 Main Street) Council Members, My name is Jun Tanega. Myself and my wife, Claudia Bremser-Tanega, live at 2518 N Spurgeon St, Santa Ana. We are one of the 11 residents located directly next to the proposed development site. I am writing you to show our complete support of The Addington Project that will be at 2525 Main Street. We purchased our home a year and a half ago knowing that some form of the development could be built at the location. It did not scare us away from buying a home located right next to the project. We have never been opposed to the project. We just wanted it to be developed responsibly. After working with the Olgulnicks for many months, we are satisfied with the revised development plan that is now proposed. We believe it will add to the beauty and value of the neighborhood. The Olgunicks have been in constant contact with us along with the rest of the home owners along Spurgeon Street, despite what the opponents to the project have said. They have addressed all of our initial concerns and actually exceeded our expectations on many of the issues we originally had. We have never spoken publicly about our support for this project for fear of being ostracized by the opponents in the neighborhood. This was seen at the last meeting where one of our neighbors in favor of the project was verbally harassed by another neighbor who was opposed to the project. There are quite a few others in the neighborhood who feel exactly same way as we do and just do not want to deal with this type of treatment for having a different opinion. Please vote in favor of The Addington. Regards, Jun Tanega Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:26 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Yes for the 2525 N. Main Street — The Addington Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Officel nhouston(@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Loretta Bult imailto:lorbult@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:25 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Yes for the 2525 N. Main Street —The Addington My name is Loretta Bult and live at 2506 N. Spurgeon, right behind the proposed Addington Main Street project. I have lived at this address for 20 years and 80 years in Santa Ana, I have seen much growth and change. In my opinion, The Addington would be a positive change to the community. It will provide needed upscale housing for Santa Ana, and also provide obvious safety improvements for the area. From the beginning, I was opposed to this development, but with the current changes to the project, fully support it. The developer has been extremely open to enable enhancement of the community rather than be another "throw it together" piece of construction. The alternatives to this project not passing do not present positive neighborhood growth. SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Loretta Bult imailto:lorbult@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:25 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Yes for the 2525 N. Main Street —The Addington My name is Loretta Bult and live at 2506 N. Spurgeon, right behind the proposed Addington Main Street project. I have lived at this address for 20 years and 80 years in Santa Ana, I have seen much growth and change. In my opinion, The Addington would be a positive change to the community. It will provide needed upscale housing for Santa Ana, and also provide obvious safety improvements for the area. From the beginning, I was opposed to this development, but with the current changes to the project, fully support it. The developer has been extremely open to enable enhancement of the community rather than be another "throw it together" piece of construction. The alternatives to this project not passing do not present positive neighborhood growth. Please vote "Yes" and support The Addington development for positive neighborhood development. Thank you, Loretta Bult Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:26 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhoustonro7santa-ana orz 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza l Santa Ana, CA 92701 cj� 2020 j rr SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Rachel Forman [mailto:rformanl2@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:00 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 AS a resident of Washington Square vote no on 2525. The reprucussions will be terrible -too much traffic, freeway entrance, etc. will create too much congestion. There is not enough infrastructure support for this project. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Diana From: Debera Hendricks <d.Hendricks@ismflex.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:25 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: 2525 N Main Street Proposed Development Dear Mayor Pulido and Councilmembers: We are Gary and Debera Hendricks, and we live at 2530 N Spurgeon Street, directly on the property line of the proposed 2525 N Main Street project. Last year we sent you a letter expressing our opposition to the proposed 2525 project and have also spoken to you in City Council meetings on this subject, believing what we thought were valid reasons for our opposition at the time. Since then there have been a number of significant changes, both to the development itself and to our perspective of the Park Santiago opposition, that have changed our views. Vineyards Development ("VDC") has made many efforts to work with the Park Santiago residents as a whole, as well as the West -side Spurgeon residents separately. VDC has made many accommodations to the community on numerous occasions, resulting in reduced size and density, and increased parking. They have also been very receptive to the concerns and requests of the Spurgeon residents, and have included all of our specific requests in the last several plan modifications. In spite of their many efforts to reach an accord with NSAPA, they have been met with obstruction and no willingness to negotiate in good faith. Further, as Park Santiago residents, we attend many of the Park Santiago community meetings and in the past have been invited to attend more private strategy meetings as well. During all of these meetings we have tried to discuss two questions: 1) what would happen to the 2525 N Main property if no re -zoning were to prevail? And 2) what number of units and design would be acceptable if re -zoning does succeed, what is your number? Unfortunately none of the NSAPA leadership has been willing to have any meaningful conversation about either of these questions. Although an acceptable number of units was expressed by a prominent member of the opposition leadership in a meeting this past Spring, he no longer stands by that number now that the project has reduced to that size. That individual is still fighting the development. The refusal to deal with either of these issues, which we consider to be critical, caused us to do our own research and to be more open to all possibilities. Our own objective research, along with our interaction with the developers and NSAPA, has caused us to change our position and support the current version of the proposed plan. The developers have met the Park Santiago community more than half way, and now have a plan that adequately responds to the issues of size, density, aesthetics and parking, as well as other specific concerns of the Spurgeon west -side homeowners and the Discovery Center parking problems. We do not believe that another office building along Main Street that constantly has a "For Lease" sign in front of it is the solution. We do not believe that an office building that is closed and empty 12 out of every 24 hours and all weekend, drawing crime and homelessness, is an acceptable alternative. We oppose many of the alternative development types that could take over that space if there is no re -zoning. As Park Santiago residents and Spurgeon Street homeowners, we are in support of the current version of the 2525 N Main project, and ask that you support it as well. Please vote in favor of the proposed 2525 N Main Street plan. Thank you, Gary & Debera Hendricks 2530 N Spurgeon Street Santa Ana, Ca 90706 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:40 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Vote No to the 2525 Main Street. Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonCrasanta-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Tristan Miller-Mansey [mailto:tristan@mansey.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:40 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Vote No to the 2525 Main Street. Hello City Council! Our family is a resident of Santa Ana. We are asking you to please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project. This project is not suitable for Santa Ana, it's residents, it's roads, it's schools, and environment. It is not only bad for our neighborhood, it is bad for Santa Ana. This is the highest Specific Development project next to single family homes in the City. There is no way to support this project without significantly impacting everyone's quality of life. Thank you! Tristan Miller-Mansey The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this matcriat/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information. Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:40 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Historic Building Preservation Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Marcia Moreno[mailto:marciamoreno@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:37 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Historic Building Preservation I urge the Council members to please preserve the historic 1930's Art Deco Zigzag Moderne Orange County Title Company building. Diana From: Loretta Bult <lorbult@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:31 AM To: eComment Subject: Yes for the 2525 N. Main Street — The Addington My name is Loretta Bult and live at 2506 N. Spurgeon, right behind the proposed Addington Main Street project. I have lived at this address for 20 years and 80 years in Santa Ana. I have seen much growth and change. In my opinion, The Addington would be a positive change to the community. It will provide needed upscale housing for Santa Ana, and also provide obvious safety improvements for the area. From the beginning, I was opposed to this development, but with the current changes to the project, fully support it. The developer has been extremely open to enable enhancement of the community rather than be just another "throw it together" piece of construction. The alternatives to this project not passing do not present positive neighborhood growth. Please vote "Yes" and support The Addington development for positive neighborhood development. Thank you, Loretta Bult Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:40 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main St Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Tracey Imailto:traceyellyn@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:37 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St Project Hello! I am against the 2525 Main St development project. This will add undue burden to our streets and greatly devalue the property around it. Please vote to reject the project. Thank you! Tracey Stein Resident, Floral Park Tracey Stein 714.925.3898 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10.46 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Letter to Mayor and City Council Attachments: 252511-16-19 rr.pdf Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonPsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Rob Richardson [mailto:rob.richardson@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:43 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Letter to Mayor and City Council Good morning, Please provide the attached letter to the Mayor and City Council. concerning the 2525 N. Main development proposal. Thank you. Rob Richardson November 17, 2019 Mayor and City Council City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Mayor Pulido and Councilmembers— The undersigned former City Councilmembers collectively possess over 50 of -years of service and all continue to live in Santa Ana. We understand and appreciate the challenges of leadership and the difficult decisions you must make for the overall city. Although you may not see us at your meetings, we have each observed the more than two-year process of the 2525 N. Main Street project. In our experience, the number of development issues that have had this level of opposition and consistent advocacy over the past 30 years can be numbered on perhaps one hand. This is one of those watershed moments for our City and its civic culture where your decision will put on full display the importance of developers and their money when spent in campaigns now and in the future against the interests of dedicated residents and their neighborhoods. The advocacy on this project has led hundreds of residents to attend dozens of public meetings to oppose rezoning 2525 N. Main Street. Should you decide to approve an unwanted project after all that has transpired over two years, it is a clear indication that the engaged and dedicated voices of your constituents have lost all meaning. The larger consequence of putting the corrupting campaign money ahead of the quality of our neighborhoods is significant. We can wonder whether any neighborhoods will be able to muster the sustained effort needed to fight off an unwanted project that lacks community support. Who among you will stand up for Logan, Sandpointe, Santa Anita, Wilshire Square, French Park, Saddleback View, Memorial Park, Washington Square or any other neighborhood you could name when their turn comes to battle an unwanted development backed by corrupting campaign money from dark sources and out of town interests? We believe residents should come first and they all deserve your support to protect their neighborhoods and quality of life. Each of us hope you will carefully consider the significance of your decision on this project and its larger ramifications for the City we love. We urge you to stand with all neighborhood associations in opposing this project. Please do not rezone the property. We need quality business development not additional luxury apartments. Sincerely, an Griset, Mayor 1984-1986, City Council Member Ward 5 Rob Richardson, City Council Member Ward 2 1990-1998 Lisa Mills. City Council Member Ward 3 1992-1996 Tom Lutz, City Council Member Ward 5 1992-2000 Brett Franklin, City Councilmember Ward 3 1996-2004 Alberta Christy, City Council Member Ward 4 1998-2006 `R1Us3L' Salas, Diana From: Suzanne Blau <shb2417@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:14 AM To: Sarmiento, Vicente; Iglesias, Cecilia; Penaloza, David; Pulido, Miguel; eComment; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan Subject: 2525 Main Street My name is Suzanne Blau and I have lived and owned my home in Park Santiago since February 2002. I email you today to respectfully urge you to vote "no" on the 2525 Main Street project. My objections to this project are multiple and varied, but here I will share just a few: 1. Wrong size and density for this location-- even at smaller overall size, the project is still too dense (58.0 DUA) and totally inconsistent with the surrounding area (single-family residential neighborhood, museum corridor) 2. Requires rezoning and General Plan amendment when current zoning is VERY appropriate 3. Developer has NOT played fairly; improper coercive tactics, misinformation to both Planning Commission and City Council, demonstrating utter disrespect and disregard for Commissioners and Councilmembers, as well as for the Park Santiago community (I can provide examples if desired) 4. Safety, safety, safety -- grave concerns for the inevitability of accidents and fatalities on account of re- positioned traffic lights; proposed pedestrian crosswalk too close to a major, already hazardous, intersection; proposed implementation of extended left-hand turn lanes, etc. Do you really want to knowingly subject the City to such obvious liability? 5. Not necessary- there are infinite POSITIVE options for this property, consistent with its current zoning and location. The Park Santiago and other neighborhoods are supportive of responsible development, but the project proposal before you is NOT RESPONSIBLE NOR NECESSARY DEVELOPMENT!! I look forward to your replies and your consideration. Sincerely, Suzanne Blau 2417 Oakmont Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92706 Email: shb2417@gmail.com Tele: 714-474-8383 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:27 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ---- From: Helen Luetto [mailto:hluetto@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:24 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Project Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project. Thank you. Helen Jones 2300 North Park Blvd Santa Ana Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Deborah <chzpuff@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:31 AM To: pbacerra@santa-ana.org Cc: eComment Subject: 2525 North Main Street Proposed Project Dear Mayor Pulido and Council members, I am writing again to urge you to follow the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the above referenced project. Since the purchase of this property it has been neglected, and in fact did not even have any security for months. A once clearly well -maintained property has been allowed to deteriorate, which has the current owners conveniently pointing to its condition as a need for this new project. One only needs to drive by to see that there is little if any security at night, and the trees are all dying due to lack of water. You have heard continued opposition from the Park Santiago Neighborhood as well as the surrounding neighborhoods which compose Ward 3. Even the Carpenter's Union is against this project. It is beyond my comprehension that any of you would vote in favor of this project. With the current amount of approved projects surrounding this site, it is totally unnecessary to vote yes. As I have written in the past, many many neighborhoods in this city have been destroyed due to this type of irresponsible planning. You need only drive through once quaint neighborhoods to see the multi -family apartments that have deteriorated and impacted formerly charming areas. If you truly want to improve the city you might consider holding the landlords of the deteriorated properties accountable for fixing and beautifying their already existing properties. As your constituents we need to know that you have our best interests at heart and are actually listening to us. Time and time again we have made our opposition clear only to have it totally ignored. This site would be far better utilized to provide professional space. We are depending on all of you to do what is right for us. Density does not equal quality of life. Slow it down before all that is left is a cement jungle, overcrowded, and overheated. Thank you Deborah Hicks-DeBach Robert DeBach Sent from my Wad Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:07 PM To: Linda Russell Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Street Ms. Russell On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 J AMartinez(ansanta-ana org L 42020 ej SAN1A ANA COUNTS http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Linda Russell <hombre.russell@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:54 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Fw: 2525 Main Street ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Linda Russell <hombre russell(a)yahoo com> To: citycouncil(a)santaana org <citycouncilCQsantaana ora> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019, 12:32:15 PM PST Subject: 2525 Main Street PLEASE do not approve this development. Our streets are congested and our infra structure and community resources are stressed without, yet, another high density living complex. For once, please don't let the almighty dollar take priority over our safety and serenity of our neighborhoods. Please vote NO on this development. Linda Russell 19th Street Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:28 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: REJECT 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Kenneth Jones [mailto:kcjonesesq@icloud.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:25 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: REJECT 2525 Main Street live at 2300 North Park Blvd. I urge you to vote to REJECT the proposed project at 2525 Main Street. Thank you. KC Jones Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Stephen Amsler Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Project Mr. Amsler, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@)santa-ana.org 2020 u SANTA ANA COUNTS httP://www.santa-ana.org This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, moy, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Stephen Amsler <samsler@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:33 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Project Hello, I'm opposed to the 2525 Main Residential Development project. Please vote against it on Tuesday. Stephen Amsler 1904 N. Flower St, Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Taylor, Summer Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO! Ms. Taylor On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) maybe subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Taylor, Summer <sumtaylor@deloitte.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:38 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project- VOTE NO! Dear Council Members, I understand you will be voting on the 2525 Project this Tuesday. I am a life long Santa Ana resident, having grown up and owned a home in Park Santiago, and currently own a home in Floral Park. My retired parents also own a home in Park Santiago. I urge you to preserve these historic neighborhoods and the single family residential home values by VOTING AGAINST THE 2525 PROJECT. The city has numerous multi -family and mixed use projects that have already been approved, including the development of residences at Main Place Mall. Furthermore, the city of Orange has approved similar projects in the Main Street area. The 2525 Project will reduce property values for Park Santiago home owners and neighboring communities, increase traffic congestion even further, and will not be beneficial to the city long term. I understand the developer has offered re-election funds and financial compensation to certain residents to support the project. I can assure you that the collective communities of Park Santiago and Floral Park will not support the re- election of any council member that votes in favor of this project. These are two unique and historic neighborhoods which have benefited from your collective efforts to improve our city, resulting in significantly higher property values over the last 10-20 years. I urge the council to not take a step that will undo those efforts. Respectfully yours, Summer Taylor 2204 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92706 This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited. Deloitte refers to a Deloitte member firm, one of its related entities, or Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited ("DTTL"). Each Deloitte member firm is a separate legal entity and a member of DTTL. DTTL does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more. v.E.1 Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: samartint@sbcglobal.net Cc: eComment Subject: RE: Please vote to Reject the 2525 N Main Street Project Mr. Martin, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Santiago Martin <samartint@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:49 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote to Reject the 2525 N Main Street Project Please vote to Reject the 2525 Main Street project Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Nanci Zinngrabe Cc: eComment Subject: RE: Please vote NO on 2525 Main Street Ms. Zinngrabe, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Nanci Zinngrabe <zcasasucasa@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:55 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO on 2525 Main Street Please vote NO on 2525 Moan street! Thank you! Nanci Zinngrabe Sent from my !Phone Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: linda salata Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main St Project Ms. Salata, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: linda salata <salata7@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:18 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St Project Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street Project! Thank you! The Salata's 2115 N Heliotrope Dr Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Sonja Garner Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Street Project. Ms. Garner, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez i Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMarLinez@santa-ana.org 200 2 j 1, SAND ANA couNrs http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the colifornia Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Sonja Garner <salgar@aol.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:22 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project. I am against this project. It is too big of a project to an already busy area of the city! Sonja Garner Sent from AOL Mobile Mail Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Tracey Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main St Project Ms. Stein, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Tracey <traceyellyn@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:37 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St Project Hello! I am against the 2525 Main St development project. This will add undue burden to our streets and greatly devalue the property around it. Please vote to reject the project. Thank you! Tracey Stein Resident, Floral Park Tracey Stein 714.925.3898 Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: GEORGE KOPYLOW Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Mr. Kopylow, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez(a)santa-ana.org g f � j 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: GEORGE KOPYLOW <gkopylow@sbcgloba1.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:43 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Please reject this projectl!UM! Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Helen Luetto Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Project Ms. Jones, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Helen Luetto <hluetto@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:24 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Project Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project. Thank you. Helen Jones 2300 North Park Blvd Santa Ana Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Susan Barnhart Cc: eComment Subject: RE: Vote on Main Street Project Ms. Barnhart, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 6S7.383.2176 I AMartinez@santa-ana.org 2020� ,_f t SANTA ANA COUNTS j http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Susan Barnhart <sb3cats@aol.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:51 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Vote on Main Street Project Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project Susan Barnhart Heliotrope Dr Santa Ana Sent from my Whone Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Rob Richardson Cc: eComment Subject: RE: Letter to Mayor and City Council Mr. Richardson, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez2santa-ana orP M 20201 c r � 1 .`:'� SAWA ANA COUNis http://www.santa-ana.org This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Rob Richardson <rob.richardson@earthlink.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:43 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Letter to Mayor and City Council Good morning, Please provide the attached letter to the Mayor and City Council. concerning the 2525 N. Main development proposal. Thank you. Rob Richardson Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Kenneth Jones Cc: eComment Subject: RE: REJECT 2525 Main Street Mr. Jones, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Kenneth Jones <kcjonesesq@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:25 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: REJECT 2525 Main Street I live at 2300 North Park Blvd. I urge you to vote to REJECT the proposed project at 2525 Main Street. Thank you. KCJones Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:33 PM To: Tristan Miller-Mansey Cc eComment Subject: RE: Vote No to the 2525 Main Street. Mr. Miller-Mansey, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2276 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org .,: 2020 j SANTA ANA COUNTS http://www.santa-ana.orgf This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Ad. From: Tristan Miller-Mansey <tristan@mansey.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:40 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Vote No to the 2525 Main Street. Hello City Council! Our family is a resident of Santa Ana. We are asking you to please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project. This project is not suitable for Santa Ana, it's residents, it's roads, it's schools, and environment. It is not only bad for our neighborhood, it is bad for Santa Ana. This is the highest Specific Development project next to single family homes in the City. There is no way to support this project without significantly impacting everyone's quality of life. Thank you! Tristan Miller-Mansey The information truasmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. Ifyou receive this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy, the materiallinformation. Salas, Diana From: Kenneth Jones <kcjonesesq@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:38 PM To: Martinez, Antonio Cc: eComment Subject: Re: REJECT 2525 Main Street Thank you Mr. Martinez Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 18, 2019, at 12:33 PM, Martinez, Antonio <AMartinezl0@santa-ana.org> wrote: > Mr. Jones, > On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. > Sincerely, > Antonio D. Martinez Management Intern City of Santa Ana j City > Manager's Office > 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 > 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org > http://www.santa-ana.org/ > This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. > -----Original Message----- • From: Kenneth Jones <kcjonesesq@icloud.com> > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:25 PM > To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> > Subject: REJECT 2525 Main Street > I live at 2300 North Park Blvd. I urge you to vote to REJECT the proposed project at 2525 Main Street. > Thank you. > KC Jones > Sent from my iPhone 1 Diana From: ahfuller43@roadrunner.com Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:16 PM To: eComment Subject: Fwd: 2525 Main Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "ahfuller43 @roadrunner. com" <ahfuller43@roadrunner.com> Date: November 18, 2019 at 12:05:06 PM PST To: pbacerra@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 Main Welcome Councilmember Bacerra! I am so happy that you've succeeded your goal and campaign. We hope you can vote against this cockamamie development at 2525 N. Main street right at entrance to our beloved neighborhood. The fact alone that Mr. Ogulnick has "bought" the neighbors that abut the project to the tune of 35K each shows just how unfair this all is. The property should stay as zoned and made to the advantage of the Discovery Science Center for their use for expansion and parking. The General Plan should expand the museum district along this section of Main St. We do not need more apartments and especially on a parcel so close to the freeway offramp. It's simply not the right place for high density housing. Marilyn Fuller 2422 Santiago St. 714 834-9073 Sent from my iPad Salas, Diana From: ahfuller43@roadrunner.com Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:15 PM To: eComment Subject: Fwd: 2525 Main Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "ahfuller43@roadrunner.com" <ahfuller43@roadrunner.com> Date: November 18, 2019 at 12:05:06 PM PST To: pbacerra@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 Main Welcome Councilmember Bacerra! I am so happy that you've succeeded your goal and campaign. We hope you can vote against this cockamamie development at 2525 N. Main street right at entrance to our beloved neighborhood. The fact alone that Mr. Ogulnick has "bought" the neighbors that abut the project to the tune of 35K each shows just how unfair this all is. The property should stay as zoned and made to the advantage of the Discovery Science Center for their use for expansion and parking. The General Plan should expand the museum district along this section of Main St. We do not need more apartments and especially on a parcel so close to the freeway offramp. It's simply not the right place for high density housing. Marilyn Fuller 2422 Santiago St. 714 834-9073 Sent from my iPad Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:51 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main Street - Is this project going to create a Public Safety issue??? Attachments: 2525 N Main Revised project access.pdf From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 1:15 PM To: mpulido@santa-ana.org <mpulido@santa-ana.org>; jvillegas@santa-ana.org <jvillegas@santa-ana.org>; vsarmiento@santa-ana.org <vsarmiento@santa-ana.org>; ciglesias@santa-ana.org <ciglesias@santa-ana.org>; dpenaloza@santa-ana.org <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org>; JSolorio@santa-ana.org <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbaccera@santa-ana.org <pbaccera@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street - Is this project going to create a Public Safety issue??? Good Afternoon Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers: The Staff Report package, which was made available by the Planning Department yesterday November 15th, has 4 sections. The proposed project details are located in the last section..... section 4. I'd like for you to focus on the revised site plan ..... one item which jumps out has to do with site access (see attachment) including the new off -set intersection and new curb cut/traffic circulation/traffic study. This new redesign includes these items below (but are certainly not limited to lust these items): 1) The off -set intersection at Walkie Way & Main Street 2) North & South left turn turn -pockets at Walkie Way & Main Street (and reconfiguration of left turn pocket from Main Street onto Edgewood) 3) The new curb cut on Main Street closer to Edgewood 4) Surface parking for Discovery Center patrons These 4 items above were not included in the original DEIR as they are new to the project. They have not been subjected to the 45 day public review process per CEQA since they were not included in the original DEIR. This could result in a legal issue for the City having an inadequate EIR for this project. However, the bigger issue from these redesign items have to do with Public Safety. The close proximity of 7 traffic lights along the stretch of Main Street from Edgewood to La Veta could pose a significant issue with Fire and Police during certain high peak traffic times. Also, the stacking when cars are trying to turn left into the proposed project, Discovery Center or into Park Santiago neighborhood will be an issue due to the staggered intersection at Walkie Way which will cause a back up on both sides of Main Street during high peak traffic times due to the short left turn pockets. The park access for Santiago Park is through the entrance of the proposed project.... this is another cause for concern as it will be confusing for drivers trying to access the park. Children visiting the Discovery Center will need to cross Main Street if parking across from the Discovery Center and due to the off -set intersection and cross walk, there may be a safety issue when crossing Main Street because of this off -set intersection. And lastly, the new curb cut closer to Edgewood and the northbound 5 Fwy off ramp will absolutely cause issues as cars will either block the intersection and/or create tremendous back up ...... again, causing a Public Safety concern. Common sense tells you that once again, the revised project is being shoe -horned into a location that can not physically accommodate the project. Again, the correct conclusion is that something better needs to be considered for this site ..... don'tjust settle for less because its easy and you feel sorry for the applicant! On Tuesday, please vote NO on the revised project ..... we all can do better!! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 Year Santa Ana Resident 714-914-8047 i o e m na Y n E 2 Go ;g _ _ 1 I I I I I I I I omF nI I_ 9 II -7 a �I 1 I I `y I I �m 1 OQ I a`� I IU I - 1 I I I ' a I m 1 la a N f in m 0 n n n I I NON — r T 1 O nN O O I aU n`o aL I i 2n Salas. Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:51 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:09 AM To: mpulido@santa-ana.org <mpulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Mayor Pulido: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as the Mayor of the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the Citv's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high density building or could this be an opportunitv to do something better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes....) feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't it." Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our Cityi Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:52 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:07 AM To: jvillegas@santa-ana.org <jvillegas@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Councilmember Villegas: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as a Councilmember for the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story _high density building or could this be an opportunity to do somethina better for our community?? Your Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes .... I feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:52 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:05 AM To: ciglesias@santa-ana.org <ciglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice -The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Councilmember Iglesias: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as a Councilmember for the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high density building or could this be an opportunity to do something better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes .... I feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:52 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUA) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:04 AM To: dpenaloza@santa-ana.org <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice -The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUA) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Councilmember Penaloza: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as a Councilmember for the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high density building or could this be an opportunity to do somethina better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, .......the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes....) feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:52 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:02 AM To: vsarmiento@santa-ana.org <vsarmiento@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is Still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to Single Family Residential (4.4/DUAs) Councilmember Sarmiento: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as a Councilmember for the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,500 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high density building or could this be an opportunity to do something better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes....l feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't it. " Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:53 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is still High Density of 58/DUAs adjacent to SFR of 4.4/DUAs From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:00 AM To: JSolorio@santa-ana.org <JSolorio@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - Bad Planning Practice - The revised project is still High Density of 58/DUAs adjacent to SFR of 4.4/DUAs Councilmember Solorio: On November 19th, you have the opportunity to act upon your fiduciary responsibility as a Councilmember for the City of Santa Ana by rejecting the proposed high density project of 58/DUAs and upholding the City's General Plan designation. It is your civic duty to see something developed that is more inline with the Goals and policies of the City's General Plan as well as a project that would be a benefit to the entire community. One such aspect would be to encourage a use complementary to the Bower's Museum or Discovery Cube since this site is located within the Museum District. Another option which is supported by the Park Santiago neighborhood would be a Medium Density (MR 15) project, demonstrating good planning principles as it is a more compatible use adjacent to Single Family Residential of 4.4/DUAs. I'm sure in your travels throughout Orange County, you've seen many of these 5 story high density buildings going up ...... there's no shortage as they are everywhere! And given the fact that there are already 3,600 units within 114 mile from this site that are built, under construction or approved, does Santa Ana really need another 5 story high density building or could this be an opportunity to do something better for our community?? Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's said it best in her closing comments on October 28th, ".....the proposed project reminds me of the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes .... I feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't Don't just settle for less because its easy...... demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... we all can do better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 year resident of Santa Ana Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:53 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts Still are the Facts! From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 10:31 AM To: jvillegas@santa-ana.org <jvillegas@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts Still are the Facts! Mayor Pro Tern Villegas: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though.. 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole communitv.... not just another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. I would encourage you to follow your Planning Commissioner Cynthia Contreras-Leo's recommendation to deny the project and uphold the City's General Plan. Commissioner Contreras -Leo said it best in her closing comments, .......the proposed project is like the child's toy where you fit the shapes into the right shaped holes .... l feel like we are trying to force something that doesn't The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:53 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 9:15 AM To: mpulido@santa-ana.org <mpulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! Mayor Pulido: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though...... 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole communitv.... not just another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. I would encourage you to follow your Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the project and uphold the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:53 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 9:12 AM To: JSolorio@santa-ana.org <JSolorio@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! Councilmember Solaria: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though...... 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole community .... not just another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. I would encourage you to follow your Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the project and uphold the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:54 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! Attachments: Walkie Way Main St and Curb Cut Exhibit.pdf From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 8:56 AM To: vsarmiento@santa-ana.org <vsarmiento@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St -The Facts are Still the Facts! Councilmember Sarmiento: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though...... 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole communitv.... not another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. The public safety issue created by this revised plan (offset intersection at Walkie Way & Main, new curb cut very close to the Edgewood & Main intersection and the revised left turn pockets .... see attached exhibit) is certainly a concern for traffic confusion and congestion especially the potential danger to the kids that will be crossing the street to the Discovery Center. Therefore, I would encourage you to follow your Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the project and uphold the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to out City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:54 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 8:16 AM To: dpenaloza@santa-ana.org <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are Still the Facts! Councilmember Penaloza: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently on October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole communitv.... not another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. Here is the opportunity to follow your Planning Commissioner Felix Rivera's recommendation to deny the project by also rejecting the proposed project and upholding the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to out City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:54 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are still the Facts From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 8:05 AM To: ciglesias@santa-ana.org <ciglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Facts are still the Facts Councilmember Iglesias: We will be before you again on November 19th for the above referenced project. The facts about this project still remain the same though...... 1. The 2525 N. Main Street Property is zoned Professional Office 2. High Density does not belong adjacent to Single Family Residential 3. Planning Commission has denied this proposed project an unprecedented 3 times .... most recently or October 28th where the revised project included many public safety issues and concerns 4. Conclusion of Facts: The proposed/revised project is still not the right fit for this location..... this site warrants something much better that would serve the whole community .... not another 5 story (with the tallest point being 74' tall) high density project especially given the 3,600 units already built, planned/approved or under construction just 1/4 mile away .... and being part of the museum district corridor, the opportunity is there to provide a complimentary use across from the Discovery Cube. Here is the opportunity to follow through with your campaign slogan of "Protects all taxpayers and puts Santa Ana Residents first" by rejecting the proposed project and uphold the City's General Plan. The facts are still the same even if the project has been revised..... its still High Density (58/DUAs) adjacent to SFR (4.4/DUAs).... a planning No -No! Thank you for your service to out City. Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:55 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main Street - This parcel is part of Park Santiago Neighborhood per the City of Santa Ana Map Attachments: park Santiago city map.docx From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2019 7:21 AM To: dpenaloza@santa-ana.org <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street -This parcel is part of Park Santiago Neighborhood per the City of Santa Ana Map Good morning Councihnember Penaloza: I wanted to make sure you were aware of this City Map. It shows that the 2525 N. Main Street parcel is part of the Park Santiago Neighborhood. As you can see, the neighborhood has about 1,100 single family residences ..... not just the 11 homes on Spurgeon which back up to the proposed project, nor the homes at Edgewood and Bush Streets and not just the parcel at 2525 N. Main Street. My point is that this is one neighborhood community and should be addressed and analyzed as one community, not individual parcel or individual street. The impacts of the proposed project will effect everyone in the neighborhood, not just the homes on Spurgeon or across the street on Edgewood and Bush Streets ..... it will directly impact the quiet enjoyment quality of the entire neighborhood. To suggest that the entire decision of this project hinges upon what the 11 homes on Spurgeon think is short sighted as its one neighborhood and all residents will be impacted..... singling out individuals just causes a divide for our neighborhood. I just wanted to give you a bigger perspective of the impacts of this proposed high density project to the whole community of Park Santiago. As you know, Park Santiago is not opposed to development ..... we want responsible development ..... that would be Medium Density (MR-15) adjacent to Single Family Residential, if its to be residential. The site is zoned for Professional Office ...... the developer purchased the property knowing this. They've been successful in the City on many other projects..... but the reality of land development is that not every project is going to be a home run or grand slam..... some are only a base hit which is better than striking out. Based on the above information, I encourage you to vote NO on November 19th. This site warrants something better that will enhance the entire community! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 Year Resident of Park Santiago 714-914-8047 525 N. Main is par f the Park Santiac eighborhood urce of Info: Ci of Santa An N hborhood Mar MP/KI/DF/JF Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:55 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main Street - This parcel is part of Park Santiago Neighborhood per the City of Santa Ana Map Attachments: park Santiago city map.docx From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 8:26 AM To: ciglesias@santa-ana.org <ciglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street -This parcel is part of Park Santiago Neighborhood per the City of Santa Ana Map Good morning Councihnember Iglesias: I wanted to make sure you were aware of this City Map. It shows that the 2525 N. Main Street parcel is part of the Park Santiago Neighborhood. As you can see, the neighborhood has about 1,100 single family residences ..... not just the 11 homes on Spurgeon which back up to the proposed project, nor the homes at Edgewood and Bush Streets and not just the parcel at 2525 N. Main Street. My point is that this is one neighborhood community and should be addressed and analyzed as one community, not individual parcel or individual street. The impacts of the proposed project will effect everyone in the neighborhood, not just the homes on Spurgeon or across the street on Edgewood and Bush Streets ..... it will directly impact the quiet enjoyment quality of the entire neighborhood. To suggest that the entire decision of this project hinges upon what the 11 homes on Spurgeon think is short sighted as its one neighborhood and all residents will be impacted..... singling out individuals just causes a divide for our neighborhood. I just wanted to give you a bigger perspective of the impacts of this proposed high density project to the whole community of Park Santiago. As you know, Park Santiago is not opposed to development ..... we want responsible development ..... that would be Medium Density (MR-15) adjacent to Single Family Residential, if its to be residential. The site is zoned for Professional OJJice...... the developer purchased the property knowing this. They've been successful in the City on many other projects..... but the reality of land development is that not every project is going to be a home run or grand slam..... some are only a base hit which is better than striking out. Based on the above information, I encourage you to vote NO on November 19th. This site warrants something better that will enhance the entire community! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin 27 Year Resident of Park Santiago 714-914-8047 N 525 N. Main is part f the Park Santiago eighborhood 'ce of Info: City of Santa Ana borhood Maps MP/KI/DF/JF Salas, Diana From: Diane Fradkin <dianefradkin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:51 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Attachments: Exhibits supporting NO on 2525 N Main.pdf From: Diane Fradkin Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:02 AM To: mpulido@santa-ana.org <mpulido@santa-ana.org>; jvillegas@santa-ana.org <jvillegas@santa-ana.org>; vsarmiento@santa-ana.org <vsarmiento@santa-ana.org>; ciglesias@santa-ana.org <ciglesias@santa-ana.org>; dpenaloza@santa-ana.org <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org>; JSolorio@santa-ana.org <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbaccera@santa-ana.org <pbaccera@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers: The Staff Report package which was made available by the Planning Department on Friday November 15th has 4 sections. The proposed project details are located in the last section..... section 4. There are some fundamental flaws which are being used by the Planning Department in order to "justify" the position of the proposed project. Its easy to rationalize something if you really want to ..... and that is exactly what is occurring on this project. In your staff report the "facts" continue to be manipulated in order to rationalize this project. I. A very small portion of the building is "tiered ........ only a small portion of the east side of the building has a limited 2 story and 3 story section .... a large majority of the building is still 4 stories..... and with 58/DUAs this is still High Density. (Section 4 - page 126 of the Staff Report and attachment) 2. The Aesthetics impact is due to the height of the building which at its tallest point is 74 feet 5 inches (6 stories) and is a "significant and unavoidable impact"; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary..... however, the fact is that the impacts can be reduced by reducing the height of the building to 2 and 3 stories from 4 to 6 stories..... this is an easy fix. (Section 4 - pages 5, 6 & 9 of the Staff Report) 3. General Plan Land Use Element...... this is so blatant as the Staff Report only lists the "goals & policies" that support the proposed project and omits the many goals & policies that the proposed project violates...... pure justification by omission. (Section 4 - page 11 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element Pages 9-15 - see attachment) 4. District Center designation for the site ...... this is flat out being misinterpreted ..... the definition for "District Center" under the the General Plan Land Use Element section "Mixed Use" states, "Residential Developments within some District Centers are allowed.... when developed as an integral component of a master planned mixed use project." Clearly the proposed project is not a master planned "mixed use" project as it is only one use which is residential. In order to utilize the District Center zoning, the project needs a commercial component such as retail or office along with the residential use to be valid. Clearly that is not the case here. (Section 4 - pages 11 & 12 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element pages 15, A-11 & A-22 - see attachment) 5. "Multi -family uses are often used to buffer Single Family Residential from high intensity uses like commercial or industrial. This statement is a half truth and very misleading ..... when multi -family is used adjacent SFR, its in the form of Medium Density (MR-15) NOT High Density at 58/DUAs adjacent to SFR at 4.4/DUAs. (Section 4 - page 12 of the Staff Report) 6. The overall benefits of this proposed project for the residents of Park Santiago are non-existent..... its not like we get a Trader Joe's or something of that nature out of this new development ...... but the City gets fees, the Developer makes money, Discovery Center gets parking stalls..... what does Park Santiago get??? An overall poorer quality of life for our neighborhood ..... more cut through traffic in our neighborhood, more traffic on Main Street, more noise and air pollution, significant impact to aesthetics, devaluation of our homes we've invested in in Santa Ana. It is your civic duty to uphold the current General Plan designation and respect the zoning that is in place which protects our home values. (Section 4 - page 14). When presented with the real facts, you can come to a common sense determination ....... this project still does NOT fit at this location..... don't just settle for less because its easy and you feel sorry for the applicant.... they took a risk on this property and it didn't work out..... they've made millions of dollars in the City of Santa Ana on The Heritage & Prisma projects which were not opposed because they were not adjacent to SRF. Demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... Santa Ana deserves better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 m� a a 0 8p a� T N a u 4 � � � ■ s n w O 3 � N V Q 0_ Q co c H Q m C Q ,C a0 N a)M W C N N X w N L I\ � § ) � \M « \ 1 - 93-v ;,1.4 / }; §) j � m.= , _�'� [ . JOS � | r \\\ � _- \ \ \\ \ \ } � n _l C ^RL D D - G _ - � - 4 L L G L \� f. Y Y _ L p - 0 S 1 -' ` a 0 [' R ct! w F T wj R q W Q.O 5-R W TF" Sc. cl Ff ^� a •y n^ 0 0� n ^ a n R� '� �' O. 7 G no. cG���Qp 42 5Gj3_ f G ygi 't C: c: -o cgs c � 'm .c^ C °o" -y-I •art ��v T 5 m ij .^�` T a• n �" a n M Z n n rnc. a G f: °t:l a 2 a S n c B R ^^ D � n °�- n °• 5 "C •2 O Cv o r qm FCC 5 g ? T� a?R y•2 0 0.S EL r�,"�.c 0 R s C h c ?< SAR � o TW n'. �g3. ^o^9 g K.3 .2 $ o.a ;• S a e•Z ^n a c P \\}\\}\ 2,lT,:f oEczzz- .;§�« I"R _}[$ `�!(§ _- -!/� )! c\±!n 7 §e!} §4lE/!f ;;_ } \(! \\\ p ) .. 0 0 o f E �-- F �, � _ L L b O.F t n Et E Salas, Diana From: Susan <s.hyatt714@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:01 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: 2525 Main St. There are reasons cities have General Plans. These Plans, if kept intact, lead to a cohesive city. When Planning Commission and City Council go off the Plan and approve changes not consistent with the Plan, cities end up with neighborhoods like French Park. I drove through there last week after remembering that Mayor Pulido had commented at a previous City Council meeting that it was regretful what had happened to French Park .... two and three story apartment complexes built right next to single family houses. While they did not appear to be high density apartments, they were still large buildings right next to single family homes. A neighborhood ruined because of poor planning and a city allowing it to be built. The property at 2525 Main is zoned for Professional & Admin., not high density residential development. Even with the proposed reduced number of units it is still way over the highest current level of density per acre. While I am not looking forward to the traffic and number of people the current under construction development at Town & Country will bring to the area, the location is more appropriate for these developments. There are currently thousands of units either under construction, proposed or approved within .5 miles of 2525 Main. There is no reasonable reason for another complex of apartments. Jobs are needed in the area for current residents and potential residents of all these new units being built. Every city in OC is building these same large high density residential units. Renters will look to find housing near theirjobs, especially with these units available all over OC. Keep the current zoning that is consistent with the current General Plan and bring jobs to the area. Protect Park Santiago from becoming another French Park by voting NO on 2525 Main! Too big, too dense for this property. Thank you, Susan Hyatt Resident, Park Santiago Salas, Diana From: Marc LaFont <marclafont@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:13 PM To: Sarmiento, Vicente Subject: NO on 2525! I an writing to encourage you to represent the voters who have elected you and vote NO on the 2525 N. Main Street Development. It's is clear that the effected residents, voters and neighborhoods do NOT want rezoning or the this haphazard change to the General Plan. I encourage you to vote NO this project. —Marc LaFont i Salas, Diana From: Stephen Amsler <samsler@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:38 PM To: eComment Subject: Main Street project Hello, I'm opposed to the 2525 Main Residential Development project. Please vote against it on Tuesday. Karen Amsler 1904 N. Flower St, Santa Ana, CA 92706 1 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:47 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Attachments: Exhibits supporting NO on 2525 N Main.pdf Importance: High Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office nhouston(dsanta-ana or¢ 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza l Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Diane Fradkin[mailto:dianefradkin@hotmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:03 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa- ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbaccera@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Importance: High Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers: The Staff Report package which was made available by the Planning Department on Friday November 15th has 4 sections. The proposed project details are located in the last section..... section 4. There are some fundamental flaws which are being used by the Planning Department in order to "justify" the position of the proposed project. Its easy to rationalize something if you really want to ..... and that is exactly what is occurring on this project. In your staff report the "facts" continue to be manipulated in order to rationalize this project. 1. A very small portion of the building is "tiered ........ only a small portion of the east side of the building has a limited 2 story and 3 story section .... a large majority of the building is still 4 stories..... and with 58/DUAs this is still High Density. (Section 4 - page 126 of the Staff Report and attachment) 2. The Aesthetics impact is due to the height of the building which at its tallest point is 74 feet 5 inches (6 stories) and is a "significant and unavoidable impact"; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary..... however, the fact is that the impacts can be reduced by reducing the height of the building to 2 and 3 stories from 4 to 6 stories..... this is an easy fix. (Section 4 - pages 5, 6 & 9 of the Staff Report) 3. General Plan Land Use Element...... this is so blatant as the Staff Report only lists the "goals & policies" that support the proposed project and omits the many goals & policies that the proposed project violates...... pure justification by omission. (Section 4 - page 11 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element Pages 9-15 - see attachment) 4. District Center designation for the site ...... this is flat out being misinterpreted ..... the definition for "District Center" under the the General Plan Land Use Element section "Mixed Use" states, "Residential Developments within some District Centers are allowed.... when developed as an integral component of a master planned mixed use project." Clearly the proposed project is not a master planned "mixed use" project as it is only one use which is residential. In order to utilize the District Center zoning, the project needs a commercial component such as retail or office along with the residential use to be valid. Clearly that is not the case here. (Section 4 - pages 11 & 12 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element pages 15, A-11 & A-22 - see attachment) 5. Multi -family uses are often used to buffer Single Family Residential from high intensity uses like commercial or industrial." This statement is a half truth and very misleading ..... when multi -family is used adjacent SFR, its in the form of Medium Density (MR -IS) NOT High Density at 58/DUAs adjacent to SFR at 4.4/DUAs. (Section 4 - page 12 of the Staff Report) 6. The overall benefits of this proposed project for the residents of Park Santiago are non-existent..... its not like we get a Trader Joe's or something of that nature out of this new development ...... but the City gets fees, the Developer makes money, Discovery Center gets parking stalls..... what does Park Santiago get??? An overall poorer quality of life for our neighborhood ..... more cut through traffic in our neighborhood, more traffic on Main Street, more noise and air pollution, significant impact to aesthetics, devaluation of our homes we've invested in in Santa Ana. it is your civic duty to uphold the current General Plan designation and respect the zoning that is in place which protects our home values. (Section 4 - page 14). When presented with the real facts, you can come to a common sense determination ....... this protect still does NOT fit at this location..... don't just settle for less because its easy and you feel sorry for the applicant....they took a risk on this property and it didn't work out..... they've made millions of dollars in the City of Santa Ana on The Heritage & Prisma projects which were not opposed because they were not adiacent to SRF. Demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... Santa Ana deserves better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 6 m .. EdgeWOOd Road QE IN o r j $¢ E m O /f �a m3 o p N D N m m D W40 o D I T � �\) �� .. :■ \ }) @13� § 7_ _ J V C TJ L `r c- C C y C F E v = v F t p L v ¢ o L C C � F C V = = TJ r N = er N V (9 U U 0 V "o V RI I\ \ \ - 4 | ) !® ! ] }\ \) } ; 2) ; i *; f• - � *` _ ,` \ j �) G§ \ } / Z i L c 5 c L c E ° e 3 L L _ .. .. V G ry N ry nl N C s - 5 E - � C E `c c 7 L v _ nj its C ] ! •l T - T L T = 2 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ ƒf )} \ } )) - \ ! ) \ \ �_- _\ z- �- ° ! � � k E R `r� _ > uJ h iu'. ',�L � �'L L C 4°. C L`P• 7 S ^'� °'E .O 7 _ .E _ .•5 � y � j",L•5 F' `Fj � c '°,vy �rJv. v k 4.° i� .°. 0 C C v .�j s ✓� � E i u L u= � v 3 v Nj C .¢t e E� r "ro" � ai` a v� a eq ° � ., •o L o E a-S �� u b U � ° � eo r c " .`: q c •� 3 9, � a � " b L v m ' ' c c y `u a � � v e � � v L F •a `^ � c` a 6 C n u d C c � y v° V T � L L .a a � EoC 1 u c' F• �,e e°e u.0 � v e e° e' �°�� `F .c.A „ � a •$ .: v V w ° '7 � w y E o� .E a Z W n$ v v :a L v� b c c° m 3 o r c `r QQF„ .7 a c Q• ,_ [" 3 v A •O C .� GC � G I 0 7 :. y x .0 E 9 N 'y Cg6 p u c >, n e a n c P. v a, G `�. C a'+ c N v •"' j+ Q zi° A V4 u V •q^ '' -y •3 4 �.. v y 4 � = �, 9 �..i = 'O v h m R E< u u y v x g, c[ •v c 3 'J N' G •v5 v o e a¢ .c e c ... 'c' y G CLY a y a '4 u j "• E `� ° O W v, a E 0. a H �b 0. L 1A • h y v r- '� '+ d v v ._ u a 3 v v HE — u � � •o ,C 0� i� rr ; F r V. m ) \ ( -'§\)} ƒ}))} �! [{!}`! ;�,(f«irj .a&(7.:)!:/;,: :_Q a;)7| C,- ells \j _ _ 444 ;[§|{!}\!;)\!!} :� - - _ = a\ _ i§§ :-_ )/� _ ; =y_ 2;Ei i± }}!s/! \)!(\<\{\{}!\(\ . . . ƒZ})). Salas, Diana From: Bill B <billbonnett@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:28 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Cc: North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance NSAPA; Fregoso, Vince; Kelaher, Selena Subject: 3rd Quarter 2019 Orange County Office Report by Colliers International Attachments: 2019 Q3 Office Orange County Report by Colliers International.pdf Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Attached is a report prepared by a leading commercial real estate brokerage that has researched and reported on the Orange County Office Building market. This report can provide valuable insight, especially since there is a Rezoning and General Plan amendment proposed for the 2525 Main St business location. This report should be used to understand the current market and forecast for this segment of the Orange County Office Market. There are also submarkets, by region of Orange Co document. unty, researched and reported in this The Orange County Office building vacancy rates expressed by the Applicant of 2525 Main St Residential Project should be Directly Compared to this research report. The Applicant, on many occasions, has stated a much higher Office vacancy rate than is supported by research, such as this detailed report. 2525 Main Street is an excellent business location and should most definitely remain zoned for professional office use, to support local job sites for Santa Ana residents. It's time to put Santa Ana Residents First It's time to support more newly built professional office locations in Santa Ana Regards, Bill Bonnett Park Santiago >> Orange County Market Activity Flattens in Q3 Key Takeaways > The Orange County office market saw a slowdown in demand, recording 91,100 square feet of net absorption. Demand in all submarkets saw a slowdown during third quarter. > Asking rental rates recorded no change from last quarter, remaining at $2.95 per square foot (PSF) full service gross (FSG). > Orange County currently has 502,500 square feet of office product under construction, all of which is expected to be delivered by the end of 2019. > WeWork continued to expand its footprint in Orange County by signing two additional leases in Irvine Spectrum for 116,261 square feet and in the Airport Area for 74,926 square feet. > The Orange County unemployment rate is among the lowest in the nation at 3.0%, down 10 basis points from last year. The largest annual job gains were recorded in leisure and hospitality services (+7,600) while educational and health services (+3,900) recorded the second largest job gain. Orange County Office Market The Orange County office market activity flattened in third quarter as tenant movement slowed while vacancy recorded a decline of just 10 basis points. Despite this slowdown, demand is expected to grow next quarter as WeWork moves into three separate locations. Coworking companies continue to grow their footprint in Orange County. As new inventory delivers to the market at year-end and tenants continue to make space efficient real estate decisions, absorption gains are expected to be limited in the coming quarters. Market Indicators I Relative to Prior Period _ Q3 2019 Forecast Vacancy y— 4 Net Absorption y Construction y Rental Rate .� Summary Statistics I Orange County, Q3 2019 Class A Class B All Classes Vacancy Rate 17.8% 10.3% 13.5% Change from Q2'19 (Basis Points) +40 -80 -10 Net Absorption* -253.1 271.3 91.1 Construction Completions* 348.8 0 0 Under Construction* 0 502.5 502.5 *SF, Thousands Asking Rents I Orange County, Q3 2019 Class A Class B All Classes Average Asking Rent $3.23 $2.71 $2.95 Change from Q2 '19 ($) -$0.03 $0.37 $0.00 Y.O.Y. Change (%) 1.9% 2.3% 2.8% Orange County Labor Force I August 2019 Total Prof. & Financial Nonfarm Business Activities - Services 12-mo Employment - — - ---- Growth (%) 0.8°!0 0.8% 0.9% 12-mo Actual Employment Change 12,500 2.700 1,100' Vacancy > Direct vacancy for the quarter was 12.4%, while sublease Historical Vacancy v. Rents I O.C. Office Market 03'75-'19 vacancy recorded at 1.1%. > Tenants looking for Class A space greater than 100,000 square feet have more options given new office construction deliveries. > The North County submarket held the tightest vacancy in the market at 8.0%. > FORECAST: Vacancy is expected to remain steady as new office product comes online at year-end. Absorption and Leasing Activity > Net absorption recorded positive but essentially Flat at 91,100 square feet. Absorption in all submarkets recorded Rat movement while much of the positive movement stemmed from the Airport Area (56,400 square feet) and West County (69,000 square feet) submarkets. > Large tenant move -ins during the third quarter included: Ready at Dawn (42,100 square feet), Alorica, Inc (31,700 square feet) and CMG (25,100 square feet) moving into the UCI Research Park in Irvine; Viant (47,700 square feet) subleasing at 2722 Michelson Drive in Irvine. > Leasing activity decreased from last quarter's 1.6 million square feet to 1.5 million, falling below the five-year historical average of 1.7 million square feet. > FORECAST: Absorption gains are expected to be limited in the coming quarters as newly built office buildings deliver to the market and tenants continue to make space efficient decisions. Rental Rates > Direct asking rental rates remained the same from last quarter at $2.95 PSF FSG. Much of this weight from overall rates staying the same from last quarter is due to Class A product, recording a decrease of $0.03. > Class A rental rates decreased by $0.03 to $3.23 PSF FSG, while Class B increased by $0.01 to $2.71 and Class C increased by $0.04 to $1.98. > FORECAST: Overall asking rates for all building classes are expected to stabilize through the end of the year as the development of new inventory slows. $3.20 $3.00 $2.80 LL jS $2.60 $2.00 $1.80 .rgENiS VI Na 3075 3016 3077 3018 3019 16% 14% 12% 10% c 8% S 6% 4% 2% 0% Net Absorption by Submarket I O.C. Office Market Q3 '15-19 1.500.000 1,000,000 w w 500,000 n 0 (50Q000) (1,000.000) 0Ne re RMM •wNsm,cmxmua,c�rars 3015 3016 3017 3018 3019 Historical Leasing Activity I O.C. Office Market Q3 '15-'19 2,400.000 2.200,w0 2=,O LL 11800,000 f/J 1.600.000 1.400,000 1200;000 1,000,000 3015 3016 3017 M18 M19 2 Construction > New construction in the Airport Area and South County submarkets totaled 502,500 square feet. The 348,800 square foot first phase of Spectrum Terrance in South County delivered half vacancy to the market during the third quarter. > Two office projects are currently under construction. The Press in Costa Mesa is under renovation (432,500 square feet), and The Source H2O in Irvine (70,000 square feet) is also underway. Both projects are expected to deliver at year end. > FORECAST: Approximately 800,000 square feet of proposed office product is expected to start construction within the next year. Investment Trends > Investment activity grew for properties greater than 25,000 square feet compared to one quarter ago, totaling $426.7 million in transaction value. Transaction value increased by 14.7% from the previous quarter. > The largest investment sale recorded during the third quarter was 4 Hutton Centre Drive in Santa Ana. The 216,900 squre foot property was acquired by LaSalle Investment Management for $55.4 million ($255 PSF). > FORECAST: Anticipated drops in borrowing rates will likely spur investors off the sidelines and into possible different product type assets. Real estate remains an attractive investment opportunity for long term investors. Outlook Although third quarter saw a slowdown in market activity, the Orange County market is expected to maintain positive momentum as the local economy remains strong. As new inventory delivers to the market at year end and tenants continue to make space efficient real estate decisions, absorption gains are expected to be limited in the coming quarters. However, positive demand will still be seen by coworking companies as they continue to expand their footprints. Orange County will remain a highly desirable market for traditional FIRE tenants as well as technology and manufacturing users. Historical Net Absorption & Construction Completions O.C. Office Market 03 '15-'19 1.500.000 1,000,000 t 5001000 a 0 o (500,000) (1,000.000) 3015 3016 Investment Trends Chart O.C. Office Market 2011-2019 $3%.00 $300.00 $2%A0 S2WJD0 $1%.00 $1%A0 $50.00 $0A0 3017 3018 3019 2012 2013 2014 20n 2016 2017 20M 2019 �$/a5F —QPW Unemployment Rate I U.S., C.A. & O.C. I August 2019 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 25% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% UnRed Sates Califomla Orange County 7.0% 65% 6A% 53% 5.0% 45% 4.0% 7 Market Description Oran.Re County Is a modpratphi larva a ihnrh�n �ffi. Suhmarket Map LA Total Leasing Leasing Net Net Submarket/ Direct Sublease Total Total g Completions Under Weighted Bltlgs Inventory Activity Current Absorption P Glass SF Vacancy Vacancy Vacancy Vacancy Activity VTO p n Absorption g Y Y Y GIIRent Otr Current Otr y F Current Otr Construction Avg Asking Prior On- SF SF SF SF SF SF Lease Rate A 112 23,455,500 15.1% 1.4% 16.5% 76.1% 451,700 1,469,000 (105,200) 69,400 0 0 $3.21 B 246 14,894,500 10.4% 0.6% 11.0% 11.8% 280.400 801,500 121.800 320,700 0 432,500 $239 C 57 2,561.600 9.0% 0.5% 9.6% 11.1% 51,200 134,600 39,800 8,100 0 SUBTOTAL 415 40,931,800 13.0% 1.1% 14.1% 15.0% 783,300 2,405,100 56,400 398,200 0 0 $2 432,500 $3.11 A 29 5,667.900 14.8% 0.2% 15.1% 12.5% 28,200 178,200 (145,700) (50,500) 0 B 83 87 6.296,800 12.6% 0.6% 13.1% 15.6% 111.100 478,400 155.100 82,200 0 0 $2. C 58 2.257,600 13.3% 0.0% 133% 13.8% 35,500 85,AOO 11.800 (17,400) 0 0 $229 SUBTOTAL 170 14.222,300 13.6% 0.3% 13.9% 14.5% 174.800 742,000 21,200 14,300 0 0 $1.79 0 E2.46 A 14 1.633,700 6.2% 2.0% 8.3% 9.3% 9,700 16500 16,700 4,300 0 B 57 55 5;174,100 79% 0.1% 81% 8.0% 22,500 150.200 (3,400) 79.100 0 0 $1.20 $2.1 C 22 958,500 6.8% 0.3% 7.2% 6.4% 6,800 28.200 (7,300) (4,600) 0 0 9170 SUBTOTAL 93 7,766.300 7.4% 0.6% 8.0% 8.0% 39,000 194,900 6,000 78,800 0 0 E2.21 A 39 6,570,200 22.5% 4.7% 27.2% 23.3% 292.200 557,800 8,900 243,900 34$800 B 3.54 219 11.932,400 9.0% 0.9% 10.0% 9.4% 125,700 620,300 (66,800) 107.900 0 70,000 $g0 $2.91 C 15 638,600 3.9% 0.0% 3.9% 3.3% 2.000 10,300 (3,600) (6,700) 0 $5 SUBTOTAL 273 19,141,200 13.5% 2.2% 15.7% 14.4% 419,900 1,1B8,400 (61,500) 345,100 348,800 70,000 $ 3..27 A 8 1,024.700 14.7% 0.0% 14.7% 12.0% 4.000 50,500 (27,800) (68,700) 0 0 $2.98 B 54 2.999.300 6.2% 0.3% 6.4% 8.6% 13,100 161.600 64,600 7,600 0 C 32 1,274,200 7.5% 0.1% 7.6% 10.1% 18,400 80.600 32,200 35,100 0 0 $224 0 $1.70 SUBTOTAL 94 5,298,200 8.2% 0.2% 8.3% 9.6% 35,500 292,700 69,000 (26,000) 0 0 E2.3838 A 202 38.352,000 16.0% 1.8% 17.8% 17.4% 785.800 2.272.000 (253.100) 198,400 348,800 B 659 41.297,100 323 9.7% 0.6% 10.3% 11.7% 552.800 2,212.000 271,300 597.500 0 0 $2.71 C 184 7,710,700 9.3% 0.2% 9.6% 11.2% 113.900 339,100 72,900 502,500 $138 14,,40 , 0 $1.98 TOTAL Ito the 87,tory base 12.4% 1.1% 13.5% 13.6% 1,452,500 4,823,100 91,100 810,400 348,800 502,500 $2,95 Note: revisions to the inventory base were made effective Q3 2019. historical data reported here reflect these revisions and may not match data reported in previous quarters. 5 Definitions of key terms in this report Total Rentable Square Feet: Office space in buildings with 25,000 square feet or more of speculative office space, including competitive space in Class A, B and C single -tenant and multi -tenant buildings. Excludes non-competitive owner -occupied buildings, buildings that include 30 percent or greater of medical or retail space, and space that is under construction, under - renovation or off -market. Class A Space: Space that an image -conscious company would lease for its headquarters. Typically, this space has a very high level of finish, an excellent location, and commands the highest rents in the market. Class B Space: Highly functional, attractive space that is less prestigious than Class A Space, and commands lower rental rates. Class C Space: Functional, competitive space with a lower level of finish and/or a less desirable location than Class B Space and commands lower rental rates. Low -Rise: Buildings with four or fewer total floors Mid -Rise: Buildings with five or 13 total floors. High -Rise: Buildings with 14 or more floors. Direct Vacancy: Space in existing buildings that is vacant and immediately available during the quarter for direct lease, plus space that is vacant but not available for direct lease or sublease (for example, being held for a future commitment). Total Vacancy: Space in existing buildings that is vacant and immediately available during the quarter for direct lease or for sublease, plus space that is vacant but not available for direct lease or sublease. Net Absorption: Net change in occupied square feet from one period to the next (including the impact of change in vacant space available for sublease). Leasing Activity: Square feet leased from all known transactions completed during the quarter excluding lease renewals. Weighted Average Asking Rental Rates: Rental rates weighted by the total square feet available for direct (ease and includes all costs associated with occupying the space, including taxes, insurance, maintenance, janitorial service and utilities. Space Added (Net): Total square feet added during the quarter via construction completions, including renovated space returned to market, less total square feet taken off -market due to demolitions or conversions. Under Construction: Includes buildings that are in some phase of construction, beginning with foundation work and ending with the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Technical Note: Colliers International is continuously refining its database. The data shown in the historical tables and graphics in this report have been adjusted to take into account these changes in the database. This report has been prepared by Colliers International for general information only. Information contained herein has been obtained from sources deemed reliable and no representation is made as to the accuracy thereof. Colliers International does not guarantee, warrant or represent that the information contained in this document is correct. Any interested party should undertake their own inquiries as to the accuracy of the information. Colliers International excludes unequivocally all inferred or implied terms, conditions and warranties wising out of this document and excludes all liability for loss and damages arising therefrom. This report and other research materials may be found on our website at www.colliers.com/yreaterlosongetes. 438 offices in 68 countries on 6 continents United States: 155 > $3.3 billion in annual revenue Canada: 48 > 2.0 billion square feet under Latin America: 20 management Asia Pacific: 44 > Over 17,000 professionals EMEA: 119 UNITED STATES: Orange County Office License No. 00813140 TEL: +1 949 474 0707 3 Park Plaza, 12th Floor FAX: +1 949 724 5600 Irvine, CA 92614 CAITLIN MATTESON ROBERT CAUDILL Research Director Regional Director/O.C. Research Services Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:28 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Eva Wysocki [mailto:evawysocki@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:12 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street For the sake of keeping Santa Ana residents in Santa Ana please vote NO on re -zoning. Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: timrush@bhhscaprops.com Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 12:52 PM To: eComment Subject: Your Council agenda today re 2525 N. Main Project Mayor & Council RE; Vineyard Development, 2525 N. Main You will hear it all this evening ......... but let me be clear....... neighborhoods are like elephants they have long memories. The question is WILL THE COUNCIL LISTEN TO NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS FROM ALL CORNERS OF THIS CITY WHO ARE SCREAMING NO to 2525? Or are they only listening to the fellow who seems to have leapfrogged onto the Council Mr. Ryan Ogulnik? His project is wrong for this location and IT ISN'T ZONED FOR IT. Please vote NO tonight on this project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Tim Rush 1225 South Broadway SA, Former President of Washington Square & Wilshire Square Neighborhood Assn's. Neighborhood Hero 1999 Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 2:39 PM To: 'Danette Shearman' Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Ms. Shearman, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their revises and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eCormnent@)santa-ana org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Re,arcls, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 � dperez@santa-ana ors aNTA 020 ANA COUNTS http:l/www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. From: Danette Shearman <dshearman@rshughes.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:44 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Hello, "Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project." It is not only bad for our neighborhood, it is bad for Santa Ana. While the project being presented is 256 units, it is still the highest Specific Development project next to single family homes in the City. Thank you, Danette Shearman Santa Ana Resident 1 Salas, Diana From: Daniel Lindburg <daniel.lindburg@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 2:56 PM Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Greetings SA City Council Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. We are crowded as is! Salas, Diana From: Flores, Rosa Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:47 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Regards, Rosa Flores I Secretary to the City Manager City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 3 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 714-647-5222 1 rfloresCEDsanta-ana.ore From: Danette Shearman [mailto:dshearman@rshughes.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:44 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Hello, "Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project." It is not only bad for our neighborhood, it is bad for Santa Ana. While the project being presented is 256 units, it is still the highest Specific Development project next to single family homes in the City. Thank you, Danette Shearman Santa Ana Resident Salas, Diana From: Kathleen Kelly <kathpkelly@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:53 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Bacerra, Phil; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: NO on 2525 Main Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. This is not a good idea for our community. There's an overwhelming objection to this project from the entire community please do as your constituents are asking. Vote noll Thank you Kathleen Kelly North Baker Street Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Gabriel M.B. Ross <ross@smwlaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:18 PM To: eComment Cc: Cesar C; Deanna Kitamura; Ben Beach; Patrick Woolsey Subject: Comment on Council Item 20E Attachments: PWF Ltr to Santa Ana Mayor and Council 2-26-19.PDF; PWF Ltr. to J. Funk 3-29-19.PDF Honorable Councilmembers, On behalf of Orange County Communities for Responsible Development, I am writing to object to the City Council's consideration of Item 20E on the November 19, 2019 Agenda. I reiterate the comments made in the attached letters, which are by this reference incorporated here in full. The lands subject to the 15 Purchase and Sale Agreements on the Council's agenda today are surplus lands under the definition of the Surplus Land Act, Government Code section 54222(b). The City may not dispose of these lands until it has followed the Act's procedures. Because the it has not followed those procedures, the sales contemplated in the 15 agreements are illegal. We therefore urge you to reject these proposals, rescind your previous actions concerning these lands, and commit to complying with the Act. If you do approve the Purchase and Sale Agreements, we will immediately seek an order enjoining the sales. Please feel free to get in touch if you have any questions. Yours, Gabriel Ross. Gabriel M.B. Ross Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP 396 Hayes Street San Francisco, CA 94102-4421 v: 415/552-7272 x249 f: 415/552-5816 www.smwiaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail or attachments. Salas, Diana From: Andrea Schartz < ayschartz@ road runner.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:30 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 Main I am unable to attend tonight's City Council meeting. Please have my letter below read at the meeting and be placed on the record. Thank you. Dear Honorable Mayor Pulido and Council Members, I implore you to vote no on the proposed 2525 Main project. This project is too big and will ruin the Santiago Park neighborhood it's oversized footprint and the inevitable parking and traffic congestion that it will impose. In addition, there are several other similar projects already in the works surrounding Park Santiago, such as at the former Town & Country site & Main Place Mall. These projects will provide housing, but will also impact the traffic flow by increasing the number of cars in the surrounding area. 2525 Main is not needed here, or next to any residential neighborhood in Santa Ana. We support common sense development and affordable housing, but 2525 Main will not provide either one. Keep this property zoned as a business and do not allow it to be rezoned. Please heed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and vote no on this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Andrea Schartz 809 E. 21st Street 92706 Salas, Diana From: Andrea Schartz <ayschartz@roadrunner.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:30 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 Main Dear Honrable Mayor Pulido and Council Members, implore you to vote no on the proposed 2525 Main project at tonight's City Council meeting. This project is too big and will ruin the Santiago Park neighborhood. In addition, there are several other similar projects already in the works surrounding Park Santiago, such as the Town & Country & Main Place projects that will provide housing, but also impact the traffic flow by increasing the number of cars in the surrounding area. 2525 Main is not needed here, or next to any residential neighborhood in Santa Ana. Please heed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and vote no on this proposal. Sincerely, Andrea Schartz 809 E. 21st Street 92706 Salas, Diana From: Marisol De La Torre <marisol.d.castillo@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:43 PM To: eComment Subject: No rezoning Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Thank you, Marisol Castillo Lifetime Santa Ana resident. Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Christine Switzer <switzer.christine@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:52 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 N Main Street Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N . Main Street. Chris Switzer, Concerned Floral Park Resident Salas, Diana From: Darcie L. Cancino <darcielc@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:44 PM To: eComment Subject: Opposed to 2525 N. Main St. Council Members, This is to once again urge you to deny the development agreement for the parcel located at 2525 N. Main St. This development remains too dense at 58 DUA, is disharmonious with the existing neighborhood, will generate significant traffic congestion on Main Street, and will result in an explosion of cut -through traffic on Park Santiago streets. Moreover, the additional apartments are not needed, as there are already close to 6,000 new units approved within a 1/2 mile of the proposed site. Santa Ana residents, not only those of Park Santiago, remain overwhelmingly opposed to this project. We have spent countless hours reading thousands of pages of documents, attending numerous City Council and Planning Commission meetings, and remain steadfast in our opposition for the aforementioned reasons. Please respect the decision your Planning Commission has made twice and reject this proposal Respectfully, Mrs. Darcie L. Cancino 909 E. Grovemont St. Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Emma Medina <emmamedinasisk@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:29 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Thank you! Salas, Diana From: jphlegal@aol.com Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:27 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: NO REZONING - 2525 N Main St As a 32-yr resident of Santa Ana, I care deeply about my City and its issues. While I thoroughly understand and support the need for additional housing units and am in favor of responsible development, I am strongly opposed to the proposed rezoning of this parcel from commercial to residential, which is directly contrary to the current General Plan and would set a dangerous precedent for the rest of the Museum District. Additionally, a project of this nature and mass does not belong adjacent to an established neighborhood like Park Santiago. Just because prior city councils have permitted massive apartment complexes to encroach upon, disrupt, and diminish some of our other vintage neighborhoods does not mean you have to. repeat such past mistakes. You should know --and do --better I am not a NIMBY and I fully support the proposed development of the many (thousands?) residential units planned for NW Memory Lane and the MainPlace Mall (which are about as close to my home as the 2525 Main St project) --because these are good examples of more responsible development which would provide additional multi -family housing units (hopefully, to also include some low-income housing) which do not directly abut --and have a buffer from --establish SFH neighborhoods. Thank you for your consideration. Julie Humphreys 2112 N Ross St., Santa Ana, Ca 92706 714-541-3452 Salas, Diana From: Anne Alex <amljalex@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:07 PM To: eComment Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Thanks for your support on this important issue. Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Anne & Courtland 2323 N Westwood Ave Santa Ana, CA. 92706 Sent from my iphone Salas, Diana From: Mason Nakamura <masonn@aol.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:36 PM To: eComment Subject: Opposition to rezoning at 2525 N Main St As a property owner in Santa Ana, I urge the council to vote against rezoning the parcel located at 2525 N Main St. Even though the project has been scaled back, it still represents development inconsistent with the neighboring communities. I suggest the council work to help find the developer a more appropriate location where he can build the enormous development originally envisioned. Mason Nakamura 2215 N Victoria Dr Santa Ana, CA 92706 Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Tracey <traceyellyn@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:34 PM To: eComment Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Hello! I am against the 2525 Main St development project. This will add undue burden to our streets and historic neighborhoods, and greatly devalue the property around it. Please vote to reject the project. Thank you! Tracey Stein Resident, Floral Park Salas, Diana From: Kevin Shuler <kevin@neighborsrep.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:33 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; dpenaolza@santa-ana.org; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: Please VOTE NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street!! As one of the primary realtors in Floral Park and the surrounding neighborhoods, I can tell you this project at 2525 N Main is a bad idea for the area residents. The traffic and congestion it will create, not to mention the parking issues the surrounding neighborhood will have to endure is just not worth it. It will also negatively effect the home values in the area which is not fair the residents in Santa Ana that right now pay the highest property taxes. Please rethink this project as there are MANY other better locations, like the huge medical office lot by the train tracks and 171h Street. PLEASE VOTE NOT to the rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street!!! KEVIN SHULER I DRE LIC. #01953088 REALTOR@ & LISTING SPECIALIST Neighbors Real Estate Partners/Keller Williams North Tustin I LIC. #01933507 17822 17th Street, Tustin, California 92780 MOBILE: 949 633 66681 FAX: 714 426 3801 Salas, Diana From: Erik Hernandez <erik.m.hernandez@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:22 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: NO on 2525 Rezoning Hello, I am a resident of Floral Park and I am writing to you today to please request you vote NO on the rezoning at 2525 N Main st. I fell this is not a beneficial project and does not enhance our community in any way. As a concemed resident and voter I am asking you my representatives to represent me and my interests where it comes to our city, neighborhood, and community. Thank you, Erik Hernandez 2301 N Flower St Salas, Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:56 AM To: Christine Switzer Cc: eComment Subject: Re: 2525 Main Street Ms. Switzer, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 1 dnerez c,santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. On Nov 18, 2019, at 6:46 PM, Christine Switzer <switzer.cbrisfine@gmail.com> wrote: Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street project. Chris Switzer, Floral Park Resident 2462 N Riverside Dr, Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:55 AM To: Marisol De La Torre Cc: eComment Subject: Re: No rezoning Ms. De LaTorre, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment a,santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 1 dperez@santa-ana org http://www.santa-ana.ore/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) maybe subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. On Nov 18, 2019, at 7:44 PM, Marisol De La Torre <marisol.d.castillo@gmail.com> wrote: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Thank you, Marisol Castillo Lifetime Santa Ana resident. Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Daisy Perez 1 (714) 586-6321 Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office City of Santa Ana Begin forwarded message: Perez, Daisy Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:54 AM eComment Fwd: For November 19 City Council Meeting - Opposition to 2525 N. Main November 18 City Council.docx; ATT00001.htm From: Janet Basalone <janetbasalone@gmail.com> Date: November 19, 2019 at 12:33:49 AM PST To: "Pulido, Miguel" <MPulido@santa-ana.org>, "Sarmiento, Vicente" <VSarmiento@santa- ana.org>, "Penaloza, David" <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>, "Solorio, Jose" <JSolorio@santa- ana.org>, "Villegas, Juan" <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>, "Iglesias, Cecilia" <CIglesias@santa- ana.org> Cc: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: For November 19 City Council Meeting - Opposition to 2525 N. Main Salas, Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:54 AM To: Janet Basalone Cc: eComment Subject: Re: For November 19 City Council Meeting - Opposition to 2525 N. Main Ms. Basalone, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment(a)santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 1 dperez n,santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.or This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. On Nov 19, 2019, at 12:33 AM, Janet Basalone <janetbasalone@gmail.com> wrote: <November 18 City Council.docx> Salas, Diana From: anya de lancellotti <adelancellotti@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 4:11 AM To: eComment Subject: STOP Rezoning Santa Ana Anya deLancellotti 2110 N Ross St. Santa Ana 92706 Salas, Diana From: Ellen Koldewey <mrskold@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:38 AM To: eComment Cc: council@santa-ana.org Subject: City Council Meeting- 2525 North Main Street Agenda Item 75(D) November 19, 2019 Greetings Mayor and Councilmembers, Request for Council Action in City Council Meeting Agenda Item 750: I continue to oppose the development at 2525 North Main Street of the 256-unit multi -family project on the 4.4-acre site with 180 parking spaces on approximately 1.4 acres to be shared by residents and the Discovery Center. I ask that you vote for option 1 in Agenda Item 75(D). Adopt the resolution affirming the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny the following applications: Development Agreement No. 2018-01; General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; and Amendment Application No. 2018-10 establishing Specific Development No. 93. Further, do not adopt the resolution certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031), do not adopt the findings of fact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations, or adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Do not vote for option 2. 2A) Do not adopt the resolution certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031), adopting findings of fact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2B) Do not adopt the ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2018-01; 2C) do not adopt the resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; and 2D) do not adopt the ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-10 for Specific Development No. 93. Information Reported in the Record in Support of the Modified Plan Remains Incomplete, Out of Date, and/or Inaccurate Here are some of the issues in the current record still requiring clarification that constituents have already brought to the City's attention: - the financial benefit now estimated to accrue to the City from this project in terms of average annual revenue and gross general fund revenue is now substantially less than originally predicted; - the negative impact on traffic safety and parking availability remains unacceptable or unknown, particularly with the anticipated sale of some of the acreage to the Discovery Center and modifications to Main Street between Walkie Way and Edgewood; - the height is still equivalent to a six -story building; - the environmental impact of the now approved Main Place Mall is still not evaluated; - the mandatory Environmental and Transportation Advisory Committee (ETAC) recommendations to Council to preserve or remove city trees may not all be included; and - the term/duration of the Development Agreement is still not described consistently. Reasons for Opposition to Current Project/Support for Responsible Development The changes made in this project since the last time the Council considered it are not substantial. Significant problems with this project remain. The people of Santa Ana do not need to settle for this misplaced, high density, outsized housing project. It is not necessary or helpful to your constituents, including those in need of affordable housing, to crowd this space with too many apartment units. As the units of the project will be priced too high to alleviate overcrowding in Santa Ana, the project will only increase the density of our City's housing. The real mistake is thoughtlessly abandoning our City's General Plan, which our Planning and Building Agency's Executive Director has aptly called the "City's Constitution." We are haphazardly rezoning piecemeal based on the wants of an individual developer rather than a coherent appraisal of what is in the best interests of the City of Santa Ana. I would like to seek a project for this property that will enhance the cultural uses of the property's neighbors on the North Main Street corridor the revitalized and transformed Main Street Mall, the Bowers Museum, the Santiago Park green spaces, and the Discovery Science Center. This portion of North Main Street should be developed as a premier business location that is part of the exciting and inviting entry to our City already underway, that can be used and enjoyed by all in our City. I greatly appreciate and strongly support the need to attract new development to our City but believe that the adjusted record at 2525 Main Street shows that the financial benefit to the City by this developer in terms of new general fund revenue will be significantly less than originally anticipated. and will not justify the very real harm that it will do to our City. Conclusion In conclusion, I am an individual voter, and home owner who for over twenty years has lived less than a mile away from this proposed development in a neighborhood that will be severely and irreversibly damaged by the decision to rezone and overbuild this parcel of land. I ask you to act in the best interests not only of the surrounding neighborhoods, and of Ward 3, but of our entire City. Together, we can do better. Think of the City's future. Continue to require complete and sound answers to the many important outstanding questions you and your constituents have asked about this proposal. Vote against this development. Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Mrs. Ellen Koldewey Santa Ana CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Jan Livingston <jansam96@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 12:15 AM To: eComment Subject: Rezoning Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Sent from my Wad Salas, Diana From: Suzy Purrington <suzypurrington@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:59 PM To: Ridge, Kristine; Gomez, Daisy; Carvalho, Sonia R.; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment; pbacerra@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 Main Project: Opposition from 7 out of 11 North Spurgeon Residents Attachments: Opposition Letters.pdf To the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, Clerk of the Council, and City Attorney, Please accept the following attachment that expresses our opposition to the proposed 2525 Main Project. These letters are from 7 of the 11 N. Spurgeon homes that share a property line with the 2525 Main property. Thank you for taking the time to read the attachment, and please vote no on the proposed 2525 Main Project (256 units). Sincerely, Suzy Purrington 2526 N. Spurgeon St Salas, Diana From: Susan Semotan <susan.semotan@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:23 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 North Main Street -Santa Ana Dear Santa Ana City Council, The proposed high density apartments being planned for 2525 North Main Street will be detrimental to the future of surrounding neighborhoods in Santa Ana, especially Park Santiago Neighborhood. Please honor the General Plan for Santa Ana, and keep this plot of land zoned for businesses. Please vote NO tomorrow night to high density apartments! Sincerely, Susan and Steve Semotan 601 East Buffalo Ave. Santa Ana Home owners in Park Santiago Neighborhood for 45 years. Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: melonpicker <melonpicker@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:14 PM To: eComment Subject: No on rezoning Please vote no on rezoning 2525 n main. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartplione Salas, Diana From: Alan Pollack <alanjoel@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:03 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 North Main NO 11! 11111111111 Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Jose Castillo <jcastillo@immagio.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:53 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: Rezoning Vote Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Thank you, Jose Castillo Salas, Diana From: Kelaher, Selena Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:06 PM To: Salas, Diana Subject: RE: 2525 75D Thanks Diana. I noticed that one of the comments appears to be missing the letter that was to be attached. Its page 101/121 of the attached PDF an email from Rob Richardson. Also, there are two comments related to Item 60A within the comments for 75D. Page 109 from Mary Ann Wettler and page 119 from Marcia Moreno. Thanks, Selena Kelaher, AICP City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency I M20 20 Civic Center Plaza I Post Office Box 1988 1 Santa Ana, CA 92702 skelaher(a)santa-ana.oro I Direct Phone: (714) 667-2740 From: Salas, Diana Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:58 PM To: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 75D https://publicdocs.santa-ana.ore/WebLink/1/doc/114230/Pate1 aspx Diana Salas I Support Staff Clerk of the Council Office 1 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-6520 1 dsalas@santa-ana.org 01(ka �- www.santa-ana.ore tVTEIO www.ocvote.com � 2 0 2 0 SANTA ANA COUNTS This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. Salas, Diana From: Martinez, Antonio Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:07 PM To: Nicolette Valdez Cc: eComment Subject: RE: 2525 Main Residential Development Ms. Ramirez, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Antonio D. Martinez I Management Intern City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 657.383.2176 1 AMartinez@santa-ana.org http://www.santa-ana.org/ This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message ----- From: Nicolette Valdez <nicolettev@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:04 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Residential Development Hello, My name is Nicolette Ramirez and I live at 2401 N. Flower Street. I am against the 2525 Main Residential Development. Thank you for you sincere consideration on this matter. —Nicolette Ramirez Salas, Diana From: Erik Hernandez <erik.m.hernandez@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:22 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente, Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: NO on 2525 Rezoning Hello, I am a resident of Floral Park and I am writing to you today to please request you vote NO on the rezoning at 2525 N Main st. I fell this is not a beneficial project and does not enhance our community in any way. As a concerned resident and voter I am asking you my representatives to represent me and my interests where it comes to our city, neighborhood, and community. Thank you, Erik Hernandez 2301 N Flower St Salas, Diana From: james wallace <wally2422@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:48 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 Main St. Project To Whom it May Concern, My wife and I have lived in Park Santiago for 42 years, raised our family here, and continue to enjoy the quality of life this historic neighborhood affords. Allowing a zone change to make way for a high density apartment complex in our back yard is an awful decision that will diminish the quality of life for this neighborhood and the city as a whole. This part of the city is already getting excessively saturated with high density apartments that are already in place, being built or on the drawing board. Enough is enough! Please vote to deny a change of zoning for this development and recommend a way to repurpose this property that preserves this century -old neighborhood for generations to come. Respectfully, Jim and Rebecca Wallace 2422 Fairmont Ave Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:04 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 20204 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: james wallace [mailto:wally2422@yahoo.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:37 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Project Dear Mr. Pulido, My wife and I have lived in Park Santiago for 42 years, raised our family here, and continue to enjoy the quality of life this historic neighborhood affords. Allowing a zone change to make way for a high density apartment complex in our back yard is an awful decision that will diminish the quality of life for this neighborhood and the city as a whole. This part of the city is already getting excessively saturated with high density apartments that are already in place, being built or on the drawing board. Enough is enough! Please vote to deny a change of zoning for this development and recommend a way to repurpose this property that preserves this century -old neighborhood for generations to come. Respectfully, Jim and Rebecca Wallace 2422 Fairmont Ave. Salas, Diana From: Nancy Smith <nancy@smithtribe.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:07 AM To: eComment Subject: NO NO NO N Main Street "Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street." Salas, Diana From: Mark Hay < mnhay2000@yahoo.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:07 AM To: eComment, Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia Subject: I oppose the current plan for 2525 N. Main St Hello Mayor Pulido and Councilmembers, My name is Mark Hay, I am a resident and home owner at 316 Edgewood Rd, Santa Ana, 92706, in the Park Santiago neighborhood. I oppose the current proposed plan for apartment development at 2525 N. Main St in Santa Ana. 1. The density is higher than is reasonable for our neighborhood, for this part of Santa Ana, and specifically for the intersection of Main St and Edgewood Rd. This intersection is already affected by heavy traffic between 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm, rush hour drive times. 2. Environmental Impact Reports by the developer for this project have failed to take into account the effect on traffic of the high density apartment developments that are currently being built around the intersection of Town and Country Rd and Lawson Way in Orange, immediately to the north of 2525 North Main. They have also failed to take into account the high -density developments that are planned for the area that is currently Main Place Mall. All these developments will create a significant increase in traffic along Main St at the intersections of Main St. and Edgewood Rd. and Main St. and Memory Lane. Main St. and Memory Lane is the next major intersection 2 blocks north of Main St and Edgewood Rd. These two intersections currently experience high traffic during the hours of 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm. 3. Environmental Impact Reports have taken NO REALISTIC ACCOUNT of the effect the 2525 N Main development will have on PARKING IN and TRAFFIC THROUGH Park Santiago neighborhood, along Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara, for apartment residents desiring alternate access to 17 St, and the 22 and 55 fwys. Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara are all 2 lane roads with homes on both 1 sides. There are a lot of children in our neighborhood as well as Hoover Elementary School on Santa Clara. Thank you, Mark Hay 316 Edgewood Rd Santa Ana 92706 Salas, Diana From: Perez, Daisy Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:57 AM To: Diane Kopylow Cc: eComment Subject: Re: 2525 Main Street Project Ms. Kopylow, On behalf of the Mayor and Council, thank you for sharing your request with the City. It has been forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. For future reference, feel free to send public comments related to items on the agenda directly to eComment@santa-ana.org. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Best Regards, Daisy Perez I Senior Management Assistant City Manager's Office I City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-647-5219 1 dperez@santa-ana.org hLtp://www.santa-ana.org This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such, may, therefore, be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. On Nov 18, 2019, at 6:12 PM, Diane Kopylow <poetpromise@sbcglobal.net> wrote: Please vote to reject the 2525 Main Street Project. I have lived here for over 45 years and don't want to see our neighborhood compromised yet again. I bought here because it is one of the last standing historic neighborhoods in Santa Ana. Thank you for your pending support. Diane Taylor Kopylow 2309 Fairmont Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Bill B <billbonnett@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 8:59 AM To: eComment Cc: North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance NSAPA Subject: Today's Article from Voice of OC on Propopsed 2525 Main Street Residential Project Attachments: Voice of OC 2525 Main Street Residential Project article published 11-19-19.pdf Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, Please see the attached article from today 11-19-2019, on the proposed 2525 Main Street Residential Project. Regards, Bill Bonnett Salas, Diana From: timrush@bhhscaprops.com Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:19 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N Main Street From: Irma Jauregui <irmapj@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:06 AM To: Miguel Pulido <mpulido@santa-ana.org>; Juan Villegas <jvillegas@Santa ana.org>; David Penaloza <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Councilmember Jose Solorio <jsolorio@aol.com>; Vince Sarmiento <VSarmiento@santa- ana.org>; Phil Bacerra <phil@philbacerra.com> Cc: suzie Sandoval <suzie.csandoval@gmail.com>; Abigail Alvarez <aalvar1223@gmail.com>; Jose J Rea <josejrea@gmail.com>; Chris Schmidt <chris714oc@gmail.com>; Dora Lopez <Iopez4080@yahoo.com>; adolfosierra@sbcglobal.net; Ginelle <ginelleann@gmail.com>; Selica Diaz <selicadiaz@yahoo.com>; Lisa Tran <lisat65@sbcglobal.net>; RaulRamos55@gmail.com; Vivian Martinez <Mmamaflip@aol.com>; 302santana@gmail.com; fpzaldiv@uci.edu Subject: Fwd: 2525 N Main Street Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers The Santa Ana Healthy Neighborhoods Alliance unites in opposition with our neighbors and associations to the north in the rezoning of 2525 N Main. We stand united with a NO vote on the rezoning. We are the densest city in the county and one of the densest in the nation.. We support effective and strong economic development on our Main Street. Rezoning is not the solution. As our elected officials we urge you to establish reasonable economic growth and development, and protect our neighborhoods that will be impacted with over - development in their neighborhoods. With the expertise of the City Planers and their team, we request that other models for economic growth and development be created within the current zoning laws, and presented to the community for our input. The city's Strategic Planning documents over time are founded on community engagement in the decision making process. We urge you to adhere to this standard that was established with the city partners and resident teams that created these documents, and the Council approved. We urge you to vote NO, and consider more effective and creative models for economic growth and development within the current zoning structure. Most respectfully Irma P Jauregui , Co -Chair Santa Ana Healthy Neighborhoods Alliance DONATE NOW SANTA ANA Santa Ana City Council Set to Vote Today on Controversial Apartments Proposal JULIELEOPO, Vain of oC Lawn signs in Park Santiago neighborhood in Santa Ana By BRANDON PHO(HTTPSt//VOICEOFOC.ORG/AUTHOR/BPHOI) I hour ago Santa Ana City Council members today will decide the face of a controversial apartmenr complex proposal, one that's mobilized the opposition of nearby homeowners, who say the project is still too large to move forward despite much downstaling by the developer. Todays vote comes after more than two years of protests and uncertainty among city officials and residents surrounding the project, which promoted numerous revisions Shttpsalvoiceof«.org/2019/08/proswsed-aoartmenrs-in-nosh-sans-ana-sdllroppoud-by-residenr�desoite- misiombto it by developer Ryan Ogulnick and his team at Vineyards Development Corp. Over the last two years, Ogulnick has shrunk the scale of the planned building at 2525 N. Main St. — located in the city's Park Santiago neighborhood — from an early iteration of more than 500 proposed apartments to now 256 apartments. Ogulnick at community meetings and in previous statements to Voice of OC has said his company has never downsized a project to this extent before. "The developer has made some concessions," said City Councilwoman Ceci Iglesias in a phone interview. "The concerns residents have expressed, according to the information we received from staff, have been addressed." https://voiceofoc.org/2019/11/santa-ana-city-council-set-to...m=email&utm term=0_6100bOe74b-06gC808f74-279579229 11119119, 8:26 AM Page 1 of 3 But residents in the nearby area remain worried the projects density would still be one of the highest in the city next to single-family homes, on top of a current plan for 511 parking spaces — an average of two parking spaces per apartment. Since Vineyards submitted its initial proposal in October 2017, the City Council has sent the project back to the Planning Commission, which in turn has rejected the project on three different occasions. "It's wrong in so many ways, this project." said resident Dale Helvig, who helped organize the neighborhood's opposition to the project. Helvig's group, known as the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance, has mobilized the project's critics to turn up to City Council meetings in large numbers. He said members of his group and residents from all over the city will be at tonight's meeting. Throughout the process, Ogulnick has attempted to appease homeowners with promises to spend over $1 million on improvements and maintenance of the neighborhood's park, as well as hiring 24-hour security to patrol around the building and the entire Park Santiago area. It remains to be seen how the Council will vote Today's meeting will be the first one for newly -elected candidate Phil Buena, who previously ran for and lost the seat in the 2018 election cycle. That year saw around $320,000 in dark money spent in the election — part of which was in opposition of Bacerra. Bacerra over the phone declined to say which way he was leaning on the project. Voice of OC revi usl re orted hasps//voi f g/2018/I I( r 'S1-BMu, th2LrOuted-170000-t- m- 1 /Lthat the campaign committee that handled the dark money spent against Bacerra was managed by a Northern California resident with family connections to a Santa Ana lobbyist for the 2525 N. Main St. project. Ogulnick has repeatedly nie any_ involvement with the dark money g up lhttps-//voiceofoc.,g/2018/11/state- invesdg ing-secretive-group-that-routed-17_0000-to-Santa-ana- elec ion Z. Bacerra — who has since been elected to the seat in this year's special election following the resignation of his former Wr ent Roman R yna d//yoif g/2n ni q/�a Lli'Bsfr - 'I/) — has in the past said he wouldnt have supported the project for its location in Park Santiago, while indicating there would be better sites for it in other parts of the city in this YouTube video from his camgw�gn p_aM fhnya://www.vaurube com! ht"-n,.i,..2Kp�1 He also in this year's special election got the endorsement of Park Santiago resident and former council member Rob Richardson, as well as former council members Tom Lutz and Alberta Christy, who are all opposed to the project. ht I s:/Ivoiceofac.org/2019/111sant a -an a -city -council -set-to_ m=email&utm_term=0 6100b0e74b-069c808f74-279579229 11/19/19, 8:26 AM Page 2 of 3 Richardson, Lutz and Christy— along with fellow former council members Dan Griset, Lisa Mills, and Brett Franklin — sent a letter this week to Mayor Miguel Pulido and the rest of the City Council urging them to strike down the apartments plan. "In our experience, the number of development issues that have had this level of opposition and consistent advocacy over the past 30 years can be numbered on perhaps one hand," the council members' letter reads. It goes on to describe the potential precedence the project's approval could sec "Should you decide to approve an unwanted project after all that has transpired over two years ... The larger consequence of putting the corrupting campaign money ahead of the quality of our neighborhoods is significait." It continues: `Who among you will stand up for Logan, Sandpointe, Santa Anita, Wilshire Square, French Park, Saddleback View, Memorial Park, Washington Square or any other neighborhood you could name when their turn comes to battle an unwanted development backed by corrupting campaign money from dark sources and out of town interests?" Now that Bacerras filled the vacant Ward 4 seat, Helvig said "it removes the possibility of a tied vote and sending it back to the Planning Commission a fourth time." Helvig said the project — on top of its controversial nature — has "turned heavily into Santa Ana politics," adding that the Council's upcoming decision on the project could determine "how were going to deal with these situations going forward." "If it comes down to how much money a developer has to throw at issues," he added, Santa Ana neighborhoods "are going to lose." Brandon Pho it a Voice of OC intern. Contact him at bt+horaooice c o (m4i1w.AphormuoireoPocorel or on Twitter @photherecord https://voiceofoc.org/2019/11/santa-ana-city-caunciI-set-tD...m=email&utm term=0_6100bOe74b-069c808f74-279579229 11/19/19, 8:26 AM Page 3 of 3 Salas, Diana From: Diego Teran <diegoteran@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:04 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: 2525 Development in Park Santiago Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council Members of Santa Ana, As a resident of Santa Ana, I want to oppose the 2525 development on Main and Edgewood. Traffic is already bad near our neighborhood and this project will just worsen this issue. As zoning rules suggest for the city, we don't want high density developments in a residential area. Thank you, Diego Teran 2106 Millwood St. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Salas, Diana From: Stephen Amsler <samsler@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:38 PM To: eComment Subject: Main Street project Hello, I'm opposed to the 2525 Main Residential Development project. Please vote against it on Tuesday. Karen Amsler 1904 N. Flower St, Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 1:47 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Attachments: Exhibits supporting NO on 2525 N Main.pdf Importance: High Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonPsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 -2020, SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Diane Fradkin [mailto:dianefradkin@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 11:03 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa- ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbaccera@santa-ana.org Subject: 2525 N. Main St - The Real Facts about this project provide the Cover you need to Deny and move onto something Beneficial for the Entire Community Importance: High Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers: The Staff Report package which was made available by the Planning Department on Friday November 15th has 4 sections. The proposed project details are located in the last section..... section 4. There are some fundamental flaws which are being used by the Planning Department in order to "justify" the position of the proposed project. Its easy to rationalize something if you really want to ..... and that is exactly what is occurring on this project. In your staff report the "facts" continue to be manipulated in order to rationalize this project. 1. A very small portion of the building is "tiered ........ only a small portion of the east side of the building has a limited 2 story and 3 story section .... a large majority of the building is still 4 stories..... and with 58/DUAs this is still High Density. (Section 4 - page 126 of the Staff Report and attachment) 2. The Aesthetics impact is due to the height of the building which at its tallest point is 74 feet 5 inches (6 stories) and is a "significant and unavoidable impact"; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary..... however, the fact is that the impacts can be reduced by reducing the height of the building to 2 and 3 stories from 4 to 6 stories..... this is an easy fix. (Section 4 - pages 5, 6 & 9 of the Staff Report) 3. General Plan Land Use Element...... this is so blatant as the Staff Report only lists the "goals & policies" that support the proposed project and omits the many goals & policies that the proposed project violates...... pure justification by omission. (Section 4 - page 11 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element Pages 9-15 - see attachment) 4. District Center designation for the site ...... this is flat out being misinterpreted ..... the definition for "District Center" under the the General Plan Land Use Element section "Mixed Use" states, "Residential Developments within some District Centers are allowed.... when developed as an integral component of a master planned mixed use project." Clearly the proposed project is not a master planned "mixed use" project as it is only one use which is residential. In order to utilize the District Center zoning, the project needs a commercial component such as retail or office along with the residential use to be valid. Clearly that is not the case here. (Section 4 - pages 11 & 12 of the Staff Report and General Plan Land Use Element pages 15, A-11 & A-22 - see attachment) 5. "Multi -family uses are often used to buffer Single Family Residential from high intensity uses like commercial or industrial." This statement is a half truth and very misleading ..... when multi -family is used adjacent SFR, its in the form of Medium Density (MR-I5) NOT High Density at 58/DUAs adjacent to SFR at 4.4/DUAs. (Section 4 - page 12 of the Staff Report) 6. The overall benefits of this proposed project for the residents of Park Santiago are non-existent..... its not like we get a Trader Joe's or something of that nature out of this new development ...... but the City gets fees, the Developer makes money, Discovery Center gets parking stalls..... what does Park Santiago get??? An overall poorer quality of life for our neighborhood ..... more cut through traffic in our neighborhood, more traffic on Main Street, more noise and air pollution, significant impact to aesthetics, devaluation of our homes we've invested in in Santa Ana. It is your civic duty to uphold the current General Plan designation and respect the zoning that is in place which protects our home values. (Section 4 - page 14). When presented with the real facts, you can come to a common sense determination.. ..... this project still does NOT fit at this location..... don't just settle for less because its easy and you feel sorryfor the applicant.... they took a risk on this property and it didn't work out..... they've made millions of dollars in the City of Santa Ana on The Heritage & Prisma projects which were not opposed because they were not adjacent to SRF. Demand the best for our City! Vote NO ..... Santa Ana deserves better! Respectfully Submitted, Diane Fradkin Park Santiago 714-914-8047 Salas, Diana From: Diego Teran <diegoteran@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:04 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa- ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Subject: 2525 Development in Park Santiago Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council Members of Santa Ana, As a resident of Santa Ana, I want to oppose the 2525 development on Main and Edgewood. Traffic is already bad near our neighborhood and this project will just worsen this issue. As zoning rules suggest for the city, we don't want high density developments in a residential area. Thank you, Diego Teran 2106 Millwood St. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:15 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Michele Lujan [mailto:bsbelle@att.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 2:08 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Hello Mr. Mayor, I wanted to take a quick minute to write you in hopes you would vote no at tomorrow night's city council meeting where you will be voting on the proposed project at 2525 N. Main st. Clearly, our neighborhood has fought hard against this development and I'm sure that you have not seen a neighborhood band together against a project in such a way before. Please vote no for the people who you represent. Thank you, Michele Lujan Salas, Diana From: Kelaher, Selena Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:09 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Attachments: MAR2525013J11182019.pdf; 2525EIR.pdf; PasadenaOfficeAnalysis.pdf Selena Kelaher, AICP City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency I M20 20 Civic Center Plaza I Post Office Box 1988 1 Santa Ana, CA 92702 skelaher(a.santa-ana.org I Direct Phone: (714) 667-2740 From: Mark Rothenberg [mailto:markllaa@me.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:47 PM To: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Cc: Fregoso, Vince <VFregoso@santa-ana.org>; Carvalho, Sonia R. <SCarvalho@santa-ana.org>; Storck, Lisa < LSto rc k @ sa n to -a n a . o rg> Subject: Re: 2525 Main Street Ms. Keleher: Please find a supplemental letter of objection to the 2525 North Main Street (Magolia) project, my original letter of objection, and a study by the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce of the positive impacts associated with office development. Kindly provide these materials to the City Council and add my objections to the project into record of the proceedings. Many Thanks, Mark A. Rothenberg, Esq. THE CASE FOR COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE: OFFICE BUILDING A STRONG ECONOMIC FUTURE FOR PASADENA Presented by the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce February, 2009 0 2009 by Pasadena Chamber of Commerce Table of Contents I. Executive Summary H. Preface III. The Impact of Commercial Office on Pasadena IV. Challenges & Solutions V. Case Studies VI. Opportunity Costs VII. Conclusions VIII. References IX. Appendix a. City of Pasadena Permit Fees and Inspection Charges b. Economic Impact Spreadsheet, 75,000 s.f. Development C. Economic Impact Spreadsheet, 100,000 s.f. Development d. Economic Impact Spreadsheet, 250,000 s.f. Development e. Economic Impact Spreadsheet, 450,000 s.f. Development f. Top Ten Property Tax Generators g. Principal Income and Expenditures, City of Pasadena h. Pasadena Historical Office Vacancy Rates X. Acknowledgements 2 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY "THE BENEFITS OF A HEALTHY COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET IN PASADENA" Following a meeting convened by the mayor and planning director to discuss concerns and issues facing commercial real estate interests, held at the Athenaeum in June 2008, the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce coordinated a series of meetings with Pasadena Transportation and Planning department heads and stakeholders in commercial real estate leasing, construction and management. The attached report is the result of these meetings, identifying the challenges and potential solutions to promote the vitality of the commercial real estate sector in the city of Pasadena. The construction and operation of commercial real estate brings tremendous fees and taxes to the city. Taxes from new development could provide a steady revenue stream to enhance the city's financial position. As an example, a new commercial office building of 100,000 square feet generates more than $1 million in one-time construction tax and traffic mitigation fees. That same building provides direct annual tax revenues to the city of approximately $145,000. Another $91,000 in tax revenues goes to support the Pasadena Unified School District. The attached report discusses the following challenges: 1. Implementing Pasadena's development vision while maintaining the viability of commercial office ventures in a competitive environment. 2. Development that promotes use of mass transit without undermining the marketability of commercial office properties. 3. Adequacy and appropriateness of parking allocations relating to commercial office, retail, restaurant and entertainment uses. 4. Inconsistencies in the planning, design review and permitting process related to commercial office spaces. Encouraging commercial real estate development in the city is consistent with the city's green objectives. It promotes a job housing balance, reduces congestion and promotes rapid transit use when properly planned and executed. Real estate development is a capital intensive, long-term endeavor. The City's efforts to address these challenges will result in an increased and stable tax base, resulting in the enhanced long term economic and social health of the community. The solutions we recommend can be implemented through a series of administrative changes, code changes and, in some cases, incorporated through the general plan revision process. Those solutions include: 1. Clearly delineating areas of Pasadena conducive to the development of commercial office space and formulating that decision, and complementing requirements, with an understanding of the challenges of market competition. 2. Revisiting parking requirements in Transit Oriented Districts, examining trip reduction strategies and considering incentives that could help realize increased transit use. 3. Review and revise parking requirements for office buildings to allow appropriate amounts of parking consistent with user demand. Adjust codes to allow shared usage between office, retail, restaurant and entertainment uses. 4. Improve the efficiency of existing permitting and inspection processes by creating a standardized process and raising the threshold for over the counter reviews of tenant improvements to existing spaces to 15,000 square feet. IL PREFACE The City of Pasadena and the businesses located here depend on the spending of those who live, work, visit and do business here to support our community. Pasadena's economic well-being hinges on the city being home to diverse, growing and dynamic commercial enterprises. The City relies on many revenue sources. Sales tax from retail stores is a major contributor to the General Fund, providing approximately 18% of general fund revenues. The Transportation and Public Works Department budgets are funded by taxes generated by the sale of gasoline, based on population formulas. Vital services are funded through property tax from residential and commercial property owners, which contribute 17% of the City's general Fund revenues. Taxes on utility use generate 15% of General Fund monies for Pasadena. In Pasadena in 2007, six of the top ten property tax generators were office developments. The aggregate assessed valuation for these six office buildings was approximately $581,000,000. These six properties provide $981,000 in property tax revenue annually to the city. These same projects bring property tax revenues of $1,220,000 to the Pasadena Unified School District, $1,743,000 to Los Angeles County and $465,000 to Pasadena City College. That $581,000,000 represents an increase of more than 80% over 1998 assessed value. Those six properties also represented 4% of the total property tax revenue for Pasadena and slightly less for PUSD. Commercial customers, including office buildings, represent 60% of the revenues to Pasadena's Power Department. Five of the top ten electric customers for Pasadena are office buildings. A typical office complex of 75,000 square feet pays, on average, $206,250 for electricity and $112,500 for other public utility services. New commercial customers present the opportunity to build on existing revenues and to install conservation protocols to meet or exceed Pasadena's green standards. Retrofitting existing office buildings with energy efficient systems could also help Pasadena meet renewable energy goals. Right now, Pasadena faces challenges to its economic stability. As in any mature city, space for commercial development of any kind is limited. The sub -prime mortgage crisis and the subsequent fallout in the financial markets precipitated a recession that has severely limited money available for investment. It is anticipated that it may be as many as four to five years before those markets recover. In the meantime, Pasadena must protect its financial foundations and plan for the future. With the concerns generated by declining retail sales projections, the shrinking spending ability of the average family along with the universal tightening of spending habits, it may be time to examine Pasadena's economic base and consider adjustments to stabilize the city's financial future. Now that our softening economy means fewer discretionary dollars in the hands of consumers, it may be appropriate for the City of Pasadena to consider adjusting the mix of retail, entertainment, restaurant, industrial, institutional and commercial office uses for the near and long term future. Sales tax dollars are dependent on market forces, consumer trends and competition and, consequently, generation of these tax dollars will be cyclical. Any city relying heavily on sales tax to fund operations will be vulnerable. Pasadena has the opportunity to be proactive in considering its economic future. Now, as the City reviews the general plan, the opportunity is presented to stabilize Pasadena's economic future and enhance the city's economic base by encouraging appropriate office development and creating an environment that facilitates leasing of existing office space. This will lessen the City's reliance on the cyclical revenues generated by retail sales. M. The Impact of Commercial Office Space on the Pasadena Economy Essential to Pasadena's continued economic growth and development is a healthy marketplace for office space. Office uses generate significant return for municipalities. In addition to property tax and business fees returned to local governments, office tenants spend money in local restaurants, contract with local service providers and buy from local suppliers. Office workers eat in local restaurants, shop in local stores and have their cars serviced in local dealerships and repair shops. Projections from the Allen Matkins UCLA Anderson School Economic Forecast for 2008 and the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation anticipate that 90% of economic growth in California to 2014 will come in service occupations: administrative and support services, retail and hospitality, healthcare services, professional, scientific and technical services. The fastest growing are expected to be healthcare, education and computer -related fields. At the same time, construction is expected to generate 163,000 new jobs. Growth industries are those utilizing commercial office space. In 2006, professional and technical jobs were 14.3% of the jobs in CA. Education and healthcare were 10.5% of CA jobs. In Pasadena in 2002, according to US Census figures, architecture, engineering, design and related companies generated revenues of $793,000,000. Of those, engineering firms generated $618,000,000 in revenue. Of those, companies providing environmental consulting service generated revenues of $11,800,000. In the San Gabriel Valley, it is expected that job growth will occur in professional and business services, including accounting and legal, architecture, design and engineering. These are high wage jobs, even for support staff, that could significantly bolster Pasadena's economy. The office vacancy rate in the San Gabriel Valley in 2006 was 6.6%. For Pasadena the vacancy rate in 2006 was slightly less than 5%, according to figures from the Allen Matkins UCLA study. The previously strong office marketplace has been subject to economic uncertainties, as well. This has resulted in growing vacancy rates. In Pasadena, much of the office vacancy is due to constriction of companies directly involved in the mortgage and finance industries. The current vacancy rate for office space in Pasadena (including sublease space) as of October, 2008, is approaching 19% according to Cushman & Wakefield. Pasadena has 5,829 businesses that provide 98,199 jobs, according to the most recent census figures from 2000. More recent estimates suggest that 110,000 people work in Pasadena on any given day. The average wage earned in Pasadena is $51,141. hi contrast, Pasadena residents' average per capita income is $34,426. In 2007, the total wages earned from jobs in Pasadena equaled $5,021,995,059. In 2007, the San Gabriel Valley lost 14,386 jobs. The unemployment rate for the Los Angeles area (including Pasadena) rose from 5% in September 2007 to 7.3% in September, 2008. RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS In 2005, retail sales in Pasadena totaled $2,168,000,000. In July, LAEDC predicted retail sales would diminish by about 1 % in 2008 when measured against personal income growth. Current figures put the percentage drop between 2% and 3%. For sales of high priced items, such as automobiles, that drop could be significantly more severe. According to US Census figures, single retail stores average approximately $307,000 in annual sales per location nationwide, while office tenants, on average, generate $337,000 in revenue. That $307,000 from each local business in gross sales returns $3,070 to the City General Fund as the local return on sales tax. (NOTE: Local sales tax return is .0075 x purchase price, plus another .0025 in state return of sales tax to the city for a total of .01 x purchase price.) As we have seen, conditions in the economy, the stability of financial markets and consumer confidence each can have a significant impact on retail sales. For generations, Pasadena has thrived on a diverse economy. The most recent General Plan envisioned corporate headquarters and office uses, thriving retail and restaurant districts, top educational institutions and healthy neighborhoods served by easily accessible shopping areas and comprehensive city services. As the economy has changed, and state funding formulas for municipalities were revised so that property taxes now fund school districts, larger portions of sales tax revenues backfilled losses to city coffers. as the state's emphasis shifted from corporate interests to retail and entertainment. OFFICE SPACE Of the 110,000 workers in Pasadena each day, most are employed in a commercial office environment. This is a "clean" industry that is growing "greener" as the City's office buildings are becoming more energy efficient. Commercial office buildings have little negative impact on the community or the environment yet return tremendous benefits in economic activity. Renovation and growth of the commercial sector are necessary for Pasadena's future to remain positive. Current economic conditions and the changing marketplace mean Pasadena must carefully consider the health of its economy. The City needs to formulate policies and consider corrective measures to sustain the economy and maintain an beneficial level of future office and retail space development. The City also needs to consider instituting flexibility to adapt to market conditions, regulatory changes and working environments. Following Pasadena's General Plan, commercial development is targeted for areas separate from neighborhoods, where traffic can be minimized and where public transportation, when mature, can serve to carry workers and customers. The City's General Plan and zoning code already include effective protections for Pasadena's residential neighborhoods. For example, current standards target commercial development in areas that will not increase traffic in residential areas, allocate land use in ways that provide Positive additions to the urban landscape, and require developers to implement mitigations that will improve traffic flow in Pasadena. Pasadena's General Plan outlines the areas of the city that are appropriate for commercial development of all kinds. Neighborhood -serving commercial enterprises are sited adjacent to those neighborhoods. Higher density, both for housing and commercial enterprises is concentrated downtown, away from established neighborhoods and adjacent to our freeways. These developments are sited near public transportation and transit opportunities, such as they exist. Further, the General Plan envisions commercial activity that is complementary to the quality of life in Pasadena's neighborhoods. In fact, a healthy and diverse business environment provides the taxes that are essential to support Pasadena's neighborhoods. The synergistic relationship between Pasadena's business and residential community represents away from neighborhoods, near freeways and downtown. smart growth principles in action. Safeguards exist so that commercial properties are located Further, it is generally recognized that new residential developments are a drain on in resources, costing more for police and fire protection, municipal services delivery and maintenance than their taxes contribute to City coffers. Commercial real estate, on the other hand, pays more in fees, taxes, and charges than the resulting costs to provide them with city services. BUSINESS FRIENDLY CITY Beyond these considerations, Pasadena must address our growing reputation as a city unwelcoming and unfriendly to business and commercial interests. Frequently, criticisms are focused on Pasadena's vague and multi -layered approval processes, lengthy environmental reviews, seemingly arbitrary design review processes and lack of flexibility to help businesses meet new and increasing municipal mandates. Anticipating the revision of Pasadena's General Plan, members of the commercial office community in Pasadena have been meeting to discuss issues facing their sector. As they discussed competitiveness, costs, opportunities and challenges, they identified the major challenges and have developed potential solutions to present to the community. As we set out to update and modernize the General Plan, we encourage all stakeholders, especially the City Council, to explore the opportunities to address challenges and find potential solutions to support a healthy jobs market and stable municipal finances that would result from the continued growth of the commercial real estate sector in Pasadena. ONE OTHER FACTnu TO CONSIDER The average commute for Pasadena residents is 23.6 miles, according to recent census figures. Optimistically assuming a 30 mile per gallon car and $2.00 per gallon gas, each Pasadena resident, on average, is spending about $1.57 per day for gasoline to drive to work, or $376.80 per year. Even with $1.00 per gallon gas, the daily drive to and from work would cost the average Pasadena commuter $.78 per day or $187.20 per year, without accounting for automobile depreciation and maintenance expenses. That same commute, at average speeds equals slightly more than 50.6 minutes per day of time lost by each Pasadena based worker, again according to U.S. Census Bureau figures. Census figures from 2000 identified more than 70,676 Pasadena residents who work, most outside the city. work Collectively, Pasadena's resident workforce is spending m$26,630,76 driving 822 hour fromeach year. each year on gasoline alone. That collective commute is taking p 1 issioned by the City of Pasadena in 2006, a major According to the Nelson/Nygaard report comm cause of congestion is a lack of parking for retail and office space and improper pricing of street - side parking meters. Good planning for future development can reduce traffic congestion. Office developments sited near Pasadena's resident workforce can significantly reduce commute times and costs for residents and decrease pollutants that result. 10 IV. CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS Several issues face the Pasadena commercial office and retail asset management and leasing teams, as well as the development community. These are complex, significant challenges that ultimately impact Pasadena's economy, stability and future. Under the leadership of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce, these challenges were identified and potential solutions devised over a seven month period in 2008. With input from the Pasadena transportation director, planning director and economic development department, interested parties met and discussed how Pasadena can improve its economic foundation and to what extent that could involve collaboration between private interests and the City of Pasadena. After identifying the challenges, the group has endeavored to provide direction for the stakeholders to pursue mutually agreeable solutions. Some will require long-term analysis and a commitment to working together to reach consensus on an action plan to build a more secure economic foundation for the City of Pasadena. Others will require attention throughout the General Plan revision process. Still others can be addressed by working with City staff to find administrative solutions. These concerns are presented along with potential solutions. It is the sincere wish of everyone involved that this series of presentations will be considered, evaluated and acted upon. We present these concerns briefly here. Detailed statistics, supporting information and descriptions of the Pasadena office space marketplace and condition are attached. CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS: 1. Challenge: Pasadena's vision sometimes clashes with reality. Pasadena's planning model is not aligned with its regulations. a. We want to be a walkable city, yet require certain businesses to maintain high traffic allocations and parking ratios no matter where in the city they are located. i. Solution: Consider instituting flexible regulations that allow for sharing of parking by different time of day users. ii. Solution: In areas where walkability is a goal, the City could lower driving trips allocated and lower required parking ratios to encourage restaurants, retail and entertainment venues that are destinations for walkers. b. We want to provide effective mass transit options, yet resist building to densities that will support that transit system. i. Solution: Encourage denser development within walking distance of transit centers and service lines. c. We want to reduce traffic congestion, but limit the amount of building parking actually needed to get cars quickly off the streets and to keep them out of the neighborhoods. 11 i. Solution: Encourage construction of more parking in commercial developments and near transit centers and off ramps. 2. Challenge: Transit Oriented District requirements assume similar density conditions exist throughout the City. Downtown areas have different characteristics than East Pasadena. Downtown is more densely developed with numerous parking structures and an urban residential and commercial environment. East Pasadena is low density / suburban in character with neighborhoods of single family homes well buffered from commercial areas. East Pasadena enjoys several convenient freeway access points, large arterial street systems, Gold Line Stations and Bus Metro Center. Further, the present transit system is immature, but TOD requirements assume a fully functional transit system. The resulting planning over -restricts commercial development with unrealistically low parking ratios. This situation promotes residential development (where lower parking ratios are acceptable) over commercial, office, or retail development. Parking ratios should reflect the reality that office space users occupy space more densely than 20 years ago i. Solution: Adjust Transit Oriented District parking requirements to recognize that all areas aren't the same. Change parking ratios at transit oriented districts to support commercial office development and encourage occupancy in existing class A space in other parts of Pasadena.. Once the transit system matures, excess parking could be used for transit riders and to allow denser office space occupancy. ii. Solution: Encourage commercial office development in East Pasadena where easy access to freeways, separation from neighborhoods and opportunities for transit exist. East Pasadena has more than adequate freeway access. Most workers in Pasadena drive from elsewhere. Locating office development near the freeways protects neighborhoods, keeps traffic out of downtown and provides easy access to work by employees. The light rail provides easy access to downtown. 3. Challenge: Construction permitting and compliance inconsistency creates delays, confusion, frustration and tension between "customers" and the City. i. Solution: All planning department and inspection personnel should work from the same set of guidelines, using a checklist, and could be trained to follow the same protocols. ii. Solution: Initial project reviews should include all required improvements, mitigations and additions so that new requirements are not added at the end of the process, causing delays and unnecessary additional costs. iii. Solution: City could develop an on-line customer satisfaction survey to assess the process. That information could be used to develop and share future best -practices by City staff. 12 b. Call up of discretionary reviews opens up an entire construction application to revision. i. Solution: Reviews could be limited to the specific subject or area of the discretionary review and not open up entire project to changes. ii. Solution: Modify codes so only the subject of the discretionary review can be considered when projects are reviewed or appealed. c. Design standards may not be specific enough to avoid confusion, lengthy process delays and challenges to approvals. i. Solution: Revisit the design standards, with input and collaboration from architects and community developers. d. Pasadena's vacancy rate for office and retail space is rising. For the first time in decades it has reached double digits. Pasadena should consider taking steps to facilitate leasing. The average size tenant in Pasadena is a small business of less than 5,000 square feet. The building department permit threshold for "over-the- counter" reviews are too low for Tenant Improvements. The current requirement threshold, at only 3,000 square feet, adds costs and time to occupy with little to be gained by the City in return. i. Solution: Modify codes to allow over the counter reviews up to 15,000 square feet if there is no use change. Increasing the threshold to 15,000 square feet, maintains the City's ability to monitor and permit appropriate growth. This change would keep costs for potential office tenants competitive with neighboring communities. 4. Challenge: Parking regulations discourage restaurant and entertainment uses in commercial areas where potential customers are clustered. While nearby office space parking is empty, typical restaurant space requires 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of space. i. Solution: Consider mechanisms (overlay zones) that allow for sharing of parking by compatible uses in appropriate areas. ii. Solution: Consider common use of parking by different time of day users. iii. Solution: Allow parking to be shared by uses without a legal covenant between the parking facility owner and the business user. b. Trip reduction ordinances (TRO's) require landlords to provide van pool and car pool parking spaces that sit idle despite everyone's best efforts to promote their use. Trip Reduction Ordinance provisions have no flexibility. i. Solution: Work with building operators to create programs that meet the goals of the TRO yet allow flexibility so that parking is not wasted. 13 c. There is no incentive to use transit. Public transit only services a small portion of the community that lives or works close enough to walk to the facilities. The Gold Line system is incomplete. Parking costs are low to employees or paid by employers. So there is little incentive for drivers to try car pooling or use public transit. i. Solution: Provide subsidies so that transit cost is lower than parking cost. Encourage employers to take the "green" approach to "cash out' employee parking costs. Pay the employees the amount otherwise spent on parking so that employees can make their own decisions whether to car pool or use public transit. ii. Solution: Find ways to provide more parking near Gold Line stations. 14 V. CASE STUDIES Four examples of the economic impact of new construction of office buildings Case Study 1: 75,000 square foot office building (Braley Building at Colorado and Raymond, Wells Fargo Bank building on Colorado) A 75,000 square foot office building would be a four story building with 50% lot coverage on an acre of land with a floor area ratio of approximately 2. A 75,000 square foot office building would be valued at approximately $24,375,000 based on current valuations of $325/s.f. For a modest sized 75,000 square foot building built today, property tax generated would be approximately $51,000 per year for the City of Pasadena, $95,000 per year for the Pasadena Unified School District, $73,000 for L.A. County and $31,400 for Pasadena City College. Ongoing Revenues, Pasadena Area City Bus. UUT PUSD PCC LA Prop. License County Tax t5 ■ Pasadena Area Ongoing Income in $1000s - 75,000 Square Feet of New Construction New office construction projects pay $3.72 per square foot in traffic reduction fees. For a 75,000 square foot development, that is $288,000 to address traffic concerns. Construction tax is levied at $0.0192 per dollar valuation of the cost of construction of the building, which would mean $238,378 for a 75,000 square foot building, based on the 2008 Los Angeles County average construction cost for new multi -story office buildings of $165.54 per square foot as reported by Reed Construction Data. In addition, Building Permit fees for 75,000 square feet of new office space generate $75,058 for the city, $112,582 in Building Inspection fees and $74,799 in other inspection costs, including Code Compliance, Plan Check, Fire Department Plan Check and Public Works plan check fees. $124,155 would also be contributed as the 1% for public art component of the project. One Time Fees, City of Pasadena 300 250 200 150 100 50 Comet. Traffic Bldg. Bldg. Other Public Tax Fee Permit Insp. Insp. Art ■ City of Pasadena One Time Fees in $1000s - 75,000 Square Feet of New Construction Property owners' business license fees average $15 per 1000 square foot for a commercial building, or $1,125 and an additional $17,000 in business license fees are collected from enterprises in the building. In total, for fiscal year 2007, business license fees generated $5,321,000 for the city's General Fund. Using accepted figures and average usage statistics, a 75,000 square foot building pays $206,500 for electricity and $112,500 for other local utilities. That usage generates $40,000 in utility user taxes, not including taxes paid on telephone and other communications services. On average, that same 75,000 square foot office complex would generate approximately $15,000,000 annually in salaries and gross receipts of $37,500,000. The commercial operations within the complex can be reasonably estimated to generate an additional $26,250,000 in salaries paid to supporting workers throughout the region and $69,375,000 in additional gross receipts in the region. The 300 workers in the building can be estimated to spend a some amount of their wages in local businesses, as well. Conservatively, $792,000 can be expected to flow into the local economy as a result of casual spending by office workers in a 75,000 square foot complex. That is 50% of the $110 weekly per employee expenditure amount calculated by the International Council of Shopping Centers, which is based on research into office worker spending done by the International Council of Shopping Centers in 2004. The calculations included spending for lunches and dinners, retail shopping and gas, among other items purchased but not services. 16 Case Study 2: 100,000 square foot office building (old Security Pacific Bank building at SE corner of Marengo and Colorado, Union Bank building at Green Street and Lake Avenue, Chamber of Commerce building in Old Pasadena.) This 100,000 square foot office building would be a three-story building and subterranean parking for only 2.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet of leasable area. A 100,000 square foot office building would be valued at approximately $32,500,000 based on currently understood valuations. For a 100,000 square foot building, another modest sized office building, built today, property tax generated would be approximately $68,000 per year for the City of Pasadena, $127,000 per year for the Pasadena Unified School District, $98,000 for L.A. County and $41,600 for Pasadena City College. Locally, that 100,000 square foot office building generates $368,000 for local governments and schools. Ongoing Revenues, Pasadena Area City Bus. UUT PUSD PCC LA Prop. License County Tax 17 ■ Pasadena Area Ongoing Income in gt000s - toa,000 Square Feet of New Construction A 100,000 square foot office project pays $384,000 in traffic reduction fees and $317,000 in construction tax to the City of Pasadena, based on the 2008 Los Angeles County average construction cost for new multi -story office buildings of $165.54 per square foot as reported by Reed Construction Data. In addition, the project would add $99,889 in Building Permit fees, $149,828 in Building Inspection charges, $99,630 in other inspection fees, such as fire, design, public works and code compliance review fees. The project would also contribute $166,540 in 1 % for public arts money. One Time Fees City of Pasadena ■ City of Pasadena One Time Fees in $1000s-100,000 Square Feet of New Construction Const. Traffic Bldg. Bldg. Other Public Tax Fee Permit Insp. Insp. Art A 100,000 square foot commercial building pays business license fees of $1,500 and an additional $23,000 in business license fees for enterprises in the building. That same 100,000 square foot building pays $275,000 for electricity and $150,000 for other local utilities. That local utility usage generates $54,000 in utility user taxes, not including taxes paid on telephone and other communications services. That same 100,000 square foot office complex would generate approximately $20,000,000 annually in salaries and gross receipts of $50,000,000. The operations within the complex can be reasonably expected to generate an additional $26,250,000 in salaries paid to supporting workers throughout the region and $69,375,000 in additional receipts in the region. The 400 workers in the building can be estimated to spend some amount of their wages in local businesses, as well. $1,056,000 can be expected to flow into the local economy as a result of casual spending by office workers in a 100,000 square foot complex, based on data compiled by the International Council of Shopping Centers. Our estimate is conservatively calculated at 50% of the ICSC estimated office worker spending at $110 per week in 2004. 18 Case Study 3: 250,000 square foot office building (approximate size of Crown City Center at Walnut and Lake, Building One of Pasadena Towers at 800 East Colorado, at Lake.) A 250,000 square foot office building would be a six story building with 60% lot coverage on two acres of land with a floor area ratio of approximately 2.15. A 250,000 square foot office building would be valued at approximately $81,250,000 based on current valuations. For reference, two acres is approximately one third of a city block. For a 250,000 square foot building, built today, property tax generated would be approximately $171,000 per year for the City of Pasadena, $318,000 per year for the Pasadena Unified School District, $244,000 for L.A. County and $103,000 for Pasadena City College. Built today, a 250,000 sf. office building would generate $917,000 for local governments and schools. Ongoing Revenues. Pasadena Area ■ Pasadena Area Ongoing Income in $10005 - 250,000 Square Feet of New Construction City Bus. UUT PUSD PCC LA Prop. License County Tax A new 250,000 sf. office construction projects pays traffic reduction fees of $960,000. Construction tax, levied at $0.0192 per dollar of construction cost, would bring $794,592 for a 250,000 square foot building, based on the 2008 Los Angeles County average construction cost for new multi -story office buildings of $165.54 per square foot as reported by Reed Construction 19 Data. Building Permit fees of $248,875, Building Inspection fees of $373,307 and other inspection fees of $248,616 would result from construction of a 250,000 square foot office building as well as $413,850 in I% for public art funding. One Time Fees City of Pasadena 1000 900 Const. Traffic Bldg. Bldg. Other Public Tax Fee Permit Insp. Insp. Art ■ City of Pasadena One Time Fees in $1000s - 250,000 Square Feet of New Construction Business license fees would bring $3,750 for the building itself and an additional $58,000 in business license fees for enterprises in the building. The 250,000 sf. building averages $687,500 in annual payments for electricity and $375,000 for other local utilities. That usage generates $134,000 in utility user taxes, again not including taxes paid on telephone and other communications services. That same 250,000 sf. office complex would generate approximately $50,000,000 annually in salaries and gross receipts of $125,000,000. The operations within the complex can be reasonably estimated to generate an additional $87,500,000 in salaries paid to supporting workers throughout the region and $231,250,000 in additional receipts in the region. The 1,000 workers in the building can be estimated to spend a small amount of their wages in local businesses, as well. Reasonably, $2,640,000 can be conservatively expected to flow into the local economy as a result of casual spending by office workers in a 250,000 sf. Complex. That is 50% of the already conservative average local expenditure of $110 per office employee, based on 2004 data compiled the International Council of Shopping Centers. This would include money spent on lunches and dinners, casual shopping and other miscellaneous spending, including gas purchases, but not services such as dry cleaners or health club memberships. 20 Case Study 4: 450,000 square foot office building (The two southernmost buildings of the Corporate Center complex; size of both buildings at Pasadena Towers at Colorado and Lake.) A 450,000 sf. office building would be a three to four-story building with 60% lot coverage on ten acres of land with a floor area ratio of approximately 2.15. A 450,000 square foot office building would be valued at approximately $146,250,000 based on current valuations. For a 450,000 sf. building, built today, property tax generated would be approximately $307,000 per year for the City of Pasadena, $573,200 per year for the Pasadena Unified School District, $573,000 for L.A. County and $186,400 for Pasadena City College. Built today, a 450,000 square foot office building would generate $1,808,000 for local governments and schools. Ongoing Revenues Pasadena Area City Bus. UUT PUSD PCC LA Prop. License County Tax 21 ■ Pasadena Area Ongoing Income in $1000s-45g000 Square Feet of New Construction A new 450,000 sf. office construction projects pays construction tax, levied at $0.0192 per dollar of construction costs, of $1,430,266, based on an average Los Angeles County construction cost for new office buildings of $165.54 per square foot, based on figures provided by Reed Construction Data. $1,728,000 in traffic mitigation fees would also result. A building of this size would generate $447,523 in Building Permit fees, $671,279 in Building Inspection fees and $447,264 in other inspection fees. In addition, $744,930 would be put toward the I % for public arts requirements. One Time Fees City of Pasadena 1800 1600 400 Const. Traffic Bldg. Bldg. Other Public Tax Fee Permit Insp. Insp. Art ■ City of Pasadena One Time Fees in $1000s - 450,000 Square Feet of New Construction Business license fees would bring $6,750 for the building itself and an additional $104,000 in business license fees for enterprises in the building. The 450,000 sf. building averages $1,237,500 in annual payments for electricity and $375,000 for other local utilities. That usage generates $241,200 in utility user taxes, again not including taxes paid on telephone and other communications services. That same 450,000 sf. office complex would generate approximately $90,000,000 annually in salaries and gross receipts of $225,000,000. The operations within the complex can be reasonably estimated to generate an additional $157,500,000 in salaries paid to supporting workers throughout the region and $416,250,000 in additional receipts in the region. The 1,000 workers in the building can be estimated to spend a small amount of their wages in local businesses, as well. Conservatively, $4,752,000 annually can be expected to flow into the local economy as a result of casual spending by office workers in a 450,000 square foot complex. That figure was calculated at 50% of the nationwide average local expenditure of $110 per office employee, based on statistics gathered by the International Council of Shopping Centers in 2004. For further reference, Corporate Center Pasadena (west side of Lake between Cordova and Del Mar) is 681,000 square feet; Pasadena Towers (at Colorado and Lake) is 439,000 square feet. 22 Secondary Economic Impacts Commercial developments directly benefit municipalities through payment of fees, taxes, license fees and charges. There are also other, less easily defined economic impacts. Commercial office space houses employees who earn salaries, for example. Using accepted formulas, those impacts can be estimated, based on the square footage of a building. For example, on average each employee requires about 250 square feet of workspace. Using a 100,000 square foot building as an example, then, it can be estimated that 400 persons would be employed there. Those 400 employees, earning the local average $50,000 annual wage for an office worker, would generate $20,000,000 in payroll each year. ❑ Annual Employee Payroll in $Millions 75,000 100,000 250,000 450,000 s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. Those 400 employees work will also help create 750 jobs in the Los Angeles County area. Those employees will also impact the regional economy. Using commonly accepted multipliers, it can be estimated that countywide, 750 employees whose jobs result from the work of the 400 people employed in the Pasadena project would earn $26,250,000 annually. 75,000 100,000 250,000 450,000 s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. 23 M al Regionaloyee Payroll in ons Those same 400 employees would generate products and services with a value of $50,000,000. ❑ Annual Onsite Employee Output in $Millions 75,000 100,000 250,000 45u,uuu s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. Each local employee has an impact on the regional economy and is responsible for economic activity beyond Pasadena. Using standard multipliers, it can be estimated the regional employees would contribute $92,500,000 in good and services output to the economy. r$M nual Regional ployee Output inillions 75,000 100,000 250,000 45u,uuu s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. Employee spending would generate significant local commerce. A 100,000 square foot office building, using half of the $110 amount calculated by the International Council of Shopping Centers in 2004 as average weekly office employee spending, could contribute $792,000. 75,000 100,000 250,000 450,000 s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. rEmployee nnual Estiamted Spending $1000s 24 VI. OPPORTUNITY COST Pasadena has limited opportunities for companies seeking office space. In the recent past, Overture left Pasadena for Burbank because the company, which germinated in Pasadena before being absorbed by Yahoo, couldn't find adequate space within the city to locate. Kaiser Permanente has recently left the Parsons Annex at 74 Pasadena Avenue and expanded operations in Burbank for exactly the same reason. Current losses would include E. Sola currently at Idea Lab! While Pasadena still serves as the regional headquarters of the company, much of the expansion is taking place in nearby cities as a result, in large part, of the inability to find adequate space to expand in Pasadena. 25 OFFICE DEVELOPMENT IN PASADENA FISCAL REVENUES AND ECONOMIC IMPACT Building Size (Sq Ft) 75,000 100,000 250,000 450,000 Employees Number On -Site 300 400 1,000 1,800 Payroll $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $50,000,000 $90,000,000 Annual Local Spending 792,000 1,056,000 2,640,000 4,752,000 Pasadena Revenues One -Time Construction Tax $239,000 $317,000 $795,000 $1,430,000 Public Art Tax 124,000 166,000 414,000 745,000 Transportation Fee 288,000 384,000 960,000 1,728,000 Other Permits & Fees 261,000 349,000 871,000 1,566,000 Total $912,000 $1,216,000 $3,040,000 $5,469,000 Annual Property Tax $51,000 $68,000 $171,000 $307,000 Business License Tax 17,000 23,000 58,000 104,000 Utility Tax & SLATS 40,000 54,000 134,000 241,000 Total $108,000 $145,000 $363,000 $652,000 Other Jurisdictions (Property Tax Shares) PUSD $96,000 $128,000 $319,000 $573,000 PCC 31,000 42,000 103,000 186,000 Indirect and Induced Impact (L.A. County) Additional Jobs 450 600 1,500 2,400 Additional Payroll $11,000,000 $15,000,000 $37,500,000 $67,000,000 26 VIL CONCLUSIONS Office development presents a low impact economic stimulus with a potential return on investment for Pasadena. Offices present opportunities for high wage jobs that pay into the local economy. Office and commercial development pays into the local economy and provides steady revenue streams to support the excellent quality of life for residential Pasadena. Quality office developments enhance the character and reputation of the City of Pasadena, as well. Revenues to the city from office uses are relatively stable and predictable. From a municipal standpoint, office development provides a very strong return on investment. Office developments also provide support for local retail, restaurant and entertainment venues. Pasadena can use its transit opportunities to help facilitate office development in areas outside of downtown. Rather than assume commuters will use the Gold Line and buses to get to work, Pasadena could market the existing transit opportunities as simple intra-Pasadena transit systems. The Gold Line presents a simple, quick and inexpensive means to travel from outside central Pasadena into downtown Pasadena, and downtown Los Angeles, for meetings, lunches and other needs. Current projects proposed for transit oriented districts require parking be limited to 2.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet. According to the Global Tenants Organization, corporations are using office space at a rate of up to six spaces per 1,000 square feet of space. BOMA statistics show average Los Angeles office buildings have three spaces per 1,000 square feet. If buildings are built to lower ratios, Pasadena will lose income as tenants will park on street or neighborhoods. Capitalizing on Pasadena's tremendous assets could help facilitate office and commercial development in ways that would reinforce the city's economic foundations without significantly impacting the quality of life in Pasadena's neighborhoods or the positive aspects of the city's commercial core. 27 VII1. REFERENCES: Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation: Recapturing the Dream http //www laedc orp/about/Center recap turingthedream.pdf The 60 Mile Circle bttV//www.laedc.org/about/Center 60MileCircle.pdf LAEDC Economic Forecast 2008-09 Mid -year Update ht!pi//www.laedc.org/reportsIForecast-2008-07-pdf San Gabriel Valley Report http7/lwww.laedc.org/reports/SGV-2007.pdf U.S.Census Bureau: Pasadena Overview htt //factfinder census gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts? event=Search&geo id=& geoCont ext & street & county —Pasadena& cityTown=Pasadena& state=04000US06& zm—& lane=en& sse=on&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010 Pasadena Economy bttp://factfinder.census.gov/servlet Table? bm= &- eo id=E6000US0603756000&- ds name=ECO200A1&- ling=en&- sse=on Allen Matkins UCLA Economic Forecast htt //www.uclaforecast.com/allenmatkinsCRES/2008/a cres survevresults iune08.pdf CB Richard Ellis http•//www.cbre.com CoreNet Global http7//www.corenetg_lobal.orjz International Council of Shopping Centers http://www.icsc.org Reed Construction Data bttpi//www.reedconstructiondata.com Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) httni//www.boma.org Cushman & Wakefield htip7//www.cushwake.com 28 IX. APPENDIX Appendix A: City of Pasadena Taxes, Fees and Charges related to Commercial Office Development. s City of Pasadena Permit Center SCHEDULE OF BUILDING PERMIT FEES (Valuation Based Permits) "Please see next pane for other related foes im st fees a I f. TOTAL VALUATION Prolecl Valudlon- .000 0.00 Pm1601 ValcellPn- OL00Io 2,000 a Building Pennh Y41A0 Building Plan Check 526.00 Code Compliance Plan Check d,Op Current Planning Plan Check 200 Design B Historic Plan Check Fire Dept Plan Check 66.00 Puhlic WO M Dept Plan Check 4Aa nr610'N amAOdltlma191C0 or FraCbd]IenYr PmJ6ct Y01ue110n- 2,mt B Y29.000 }21.c0 5.00 }26.00 tc0 }9.00 .00 }200 too 71.00 1.00 }6.00 fit utl }4.10 1.od Flrn92A00 cam Maltlma191,p000r rraFpn:nerecr - MOJecl Valutllm5.00110 Awl -se Mo." }19.g0 $122.09 620.00 }19.6a Zed }11.00 200 }2,W ,00 o0 }n.tla 00 Flrn 92c,000 Eam AOOltlma191.000Ort�i4fJn Terecr Pmlec I V6Wrtlon 50.001-to F,00,000 6420.00 614.00 317so0 fiZee10.00 4".00 2 46109 200 }12.00 1.00 }126.00 HPfi }60go tlo "ind VC.000 =_ac0A0abmal0t,000 cr lrt-.bc flleWr Prolecl veluaiwn-}t00,0il and dvx 3767.00 6.00 $1,06.00 1I1.00 $11400 1.00 391.00 lUe }21.00 1.00 #25.m KUO 614f.00 t00 Flm 51 C0,000 cam PAlltlma91,000 ar hac-Jcnmerxt I }1.160.00 6.00ra.gu }1.742P0 }1T900 tm 11198.00 100 }92.00 100 3941.00 6200 5219.00 1.c0 noes Paton as nVork without a P dI CBCSection 1084 51,000.O0crtmcethe E, ,ng Perrrii Fee. ohiehever is greaser Reactivate Expired Bp ldi P Parch l' d related sub -trades) 6 215.00 "Please see next page for Other related fees, impact fees and taxes for Building Permits" Mectve MY 1, 2006 t updated January 2, 2009 Pasacs- Pemc% Center... 175 Ncnh Gar(eld Avenue Pasadena, CA 91101 (e2e) T444200 29 Appendix B: Table of Economic Impact, 75,000 square foot development Office Space Sq Ft 75,000 Value PSF $325 Confirmed with a local broker Total $24,375,000 Construction Cost 12,415,500 $165.54 per s.f. Los Angeles County average Operations Employees Sq Ft Per Employee 250 Accepted factor for office space Number 300 Payroll Average Per Employee $50,000 Avereage - Depends on business activity Total $15,000,000 Gross Receipts Percent of Payroll r 250% Average - Depends on business activity Amount $37,500,000 Utility Usage Electric Other Annual PSF $2.75 $1.50 Annual Total $206,250 $112,500 Fiscal Revenues Property Tax 1.0000% General Levy Share Amount Pasadena 21% $51,000 PUSD 28% 68,000 L.A. County 30% 73,000 PCC 11% 27,000 Others 10% 24,000 Voted Indebtedness 0% 4,245 Rate=.017417% PCC PUSD 0% 15,538 Rate=.063747°% PUSD Measure TT 0% 11,676 Rate=.0479% Total $274,459 Business License Tax Commercial Space Per 1,000 St $15.00 Total $1,125 Employees 30 Category Gen Bus Professional Total Rate $27.00 $180.00 Share of Total 80% 20% Average - Depends on business activity Amount $6,000 $11,000 $17,000 Utility Tax (Plus SLATS) Rate Amount Electric 15.10% $31,000 Other 8.00% 9,000 Total $40,000 Summary Amount of Office Space 75,000 Sq Ft On Site Fiscal Revenues Pasadena Others Property Tax $51,000 $192,000 Utility Tax 40,000 0 Business License 17,000 0 Total $108,000 $192,000 300,000 Economic Impact Personal Total Jobs Income Output On Site 300 $15,000,000 $37,500,000 L.A. County Total Multiplier Factor 2.50 1.75 1.85 Average for office users Amount 750 $26,250,000 $69,375,000 City of Pasadena One Time Fees Construction Fees Construction Tax Rate Tax rate .0192 of cost of constriction Total 238,378 Traffic Reduction Fee Rate per s.f. 4 $4 Total 288,000 Building Permit Fees 75,058 Building Inspection 112,582 Other Inspection Fees 74,799 Public Art Fee 124,155 Total 912,971 Secondary impact 792,000 Annualized based on 50% (employee spending) of estimated weekly office employee spending of $110 31 Appendix C: Table of Economic Impact, 100,000 square foot development Office Space Sq Ft F 100,000 Value PSF $325 Confirmed with a local broker Total $32,500,000 Construction Cost Operations Employees Sq Ft Per Employee Number Payroll Average Per Employee Total Gross Receipts Percent of Payroll Amount Utility Usage Annual PSF Annual Total Fiscal Revenues Property Tax General Levy Pasadena PUSD L.A. County PCC Others Voted Indebtedness PCC PUSD PUSD Measure TT Total Business License Tax Commercial Space Per 1,000 St Total Employees Category 32 16,554,000 $165.54 per s.f. Los Angeles County average 2501 Accepted factor for office space 400 $50,000 Avereage - Depends on business activity $20,000,000 250% Average - Depends on business activity $50,000,000 Electric Other $2.75 $1.50 $275,000 $150,000 1.0000% Share Amount 21% $68,000 28%, 91,000 30% 98,000 11% 36,000 10% 33,000 0%, 5,661 0% 20,718 0% 15,568 $367,946 $15.00 $1,500 Gen Bus Professional Total Rate=.017417% Rate=.063747% Rate=.0479% Rate $27.00 $180.00 Share of Total 80% 20% Average- Depends on business activity Amount $9,000 $14,000 $23,000 Utility Tax (Plus SLATS) Rate Amount Electric 15.10% $42,000 Other 8.00% 12,000 Total $54,000 Summary Amount of Office Space 100,000 Sq Ft On Site Fiscal Revenues Pasadena Others Property Tax $68,000 $258,000 Utility Tax 54,000 0 Business License 23,000 0 Total $145,000 $258,000 403,000 Economic Impact Personal Total Jobs Income Output On Site 400 $20,000,000 $50,000,000 L.A. County Total Multiplier Factor 2.50 1.75 1.85 Average for office users Amount 1,000 $35,000,000 $92,500,000 City of Pasadena One Time Fees Construction Fees Construction Tax Rate Tax rate .0192 of cost of construction Total 317,837 Traffic Reduction Fee Rate per s.f. 4 Total 384,000 $4 #REFI Building Permit Fees 99,889 Building Inspection 149,828 Other Inspection Fees 99,630 Public Art Fee 165,540 Total 1,216,724 Secondary impact 1,056,000 Annualized based on 50% (employee spending) of estimated weekly office employee spending of $110 33 Appendix D: Table of Economic Impact, 250,000 square foot development Office Space Sq Ft 250,000 Value PSF $325 Confirmed with a local broker Total $81,250,000 Construction Cost 41,385,000 $165.54 per s.f. Los Angeles County average Operations Employees Sq Ft Per Employee 250 Very commonly used factor for office space Number 1,000 Payroll Average Per Employee $50,000 Avereage -Depends on the type of business activity Total $50,000,000 Gross Receipts Percent of Payroll 250% Average -Depends on the type of business activity Amount $125,000,000 Utility Usage Electric Other Annual PSF $2.75 $1.50 Annual Total $687,500 $375,000 Fiscal Revenues Property Tax 1.0000% General Levy Share Amount Pasadena 21% $171,000 PUSD 28% 228,000 L.A. County 30% 244,000 PCC 11 % 89,000 Others 10% 81,000 Voted Indebtedness 0% 14 151 Rate=.017417% PCC 0% 51,794 Rate=.063747% PUSD PUSD Measure TT 0% 38,919 Rate=.0479% Total $917,865 Business License Tax Commercial Space Per1,000 St $15.00 Total $3,750 Employees 34 Category Gen Bus Professional Rate $27.00 L: $180.00 Share of Total 80°/, 20% Amount $22,000 $36,000 Utility Tax (Plus SLATS) Electric Other Total Summary Amount of Office Space On Site Fiscal Revenues Property Tax Utility Tax Business License Total Economic Impact On Site L.A. County Total Multiplier Factor Amount City of Pasadena One Time Fees Rate Amount 15.10% $104,000 8.00% 30.000 $134,000 250,000 Sq Ft Pasadena Others $171,000 $642,000 134,000 0 58,000 0 $363,000 $642,000 Total Average - Depends on the type of business activity $58,000 11005,000 Personal Total Jobs Income Output 1,000 $50,000,000 $125,000,000 2.50 1.75 1.85 Average for office users 2,500 $87,500,000 $231,250,000 Construction Fees Construction Tax Rate Total 794,592 Tax rate .0192 of cost of construction Traffic Reduction Fee Rate per s.f. 4 Total 960,000 $4 Building Permit Fees 248,875 Building Inspection 373,307 Other Inspection Fees 248,616 Public Art Fee 413,850 Total 3,039,240 Secondary impact (employee spending) 2,640,000 Annualized based on 50% of estimated weekly office 35 Appendix E: Table of Economic Impact, 450,000 square foot development Office Space Sq Ft Value PSF Total Construction Cost Operations Employees Sq Ft Per Employee Number Payroll Average Per Employee Total Gross Receipts Percent of Payroll Amount Utility Usage Annual PSF Annual Total Fiscal Revenues Property Tax General Levy Pasadena PUSD L.A. County PCC Others Voted Indebtedness PCC PUSD PUSD Measure TT Total Business License Tax Commercial Space Per 1,000 Sf Total Employees Category i 450, 000 $325 Confirmed with a local broker $146,250,000 74,493,000 $165.54 per s.f. Los Angeles County average 250 very commonly used factor for office space 1,800 $50,000 Avereage - Depends on the type of business activity $90,000,000 250% Average - Depends on the type of business activity $225,000,000 Electric Other $2.75 $1.50 $1,237,500 $675,000 1.0000% Share Amount $307,000 410,000 A 439,000 161,000 10% 146,000 0% 25,472 0% 93,230 0% 70,054 $1,651,756 $15.00 $6,750 Gen Bus Professional Total Rate=.017417% Rate=.063747% Rate=.0479% Rate $27.00 $180.00 Share of Total 80% 20% Amount $39,000 $65,000 Utility Tax (Plus SLATS) Rate Amount Electric 15.10% $187,000 Other 8.00% 54,000 Total $241,000 Average - Depends on the type of business activity $104,000 Summary Amount of Office Space 450,000 Sq Ft On Site Fiscal Revenues Pasadena Others Property Tax $307,000 $1,156,000 Utility Tax 241,000 0 Business License 104,000 0 Total $652,000 $1,156,000 1,808,000 Economic Impact Personal Total On Site Jobs Income Output L.A. County Total 1,800 $90,000,000 $225,000,000 Multiplier Factor Amount 2.50 1.75 1.85 Average for office users 4,500 $157,500,000 $416,250,000 City of Pasadena One Time Fees Construction Fees Construction Tax Rate Tax Total rate .0192 of cost of construction 1,430,266 Traffic Reduction Fee Rate per s.f. 4 Total 1,728,000 $4 Building Permit Fees 447,523 Building Inspection 671,279 Other Inspection Fees 447,264 Public Art Fee 744,930 Total 5,469,262 Secondary impact 4,752,000 Annualized based on 50% (employee spending) of estimated weekly office 37 Appendix F: Top Property Tax Generators for City of Pasadena Table 7 CITY OF PASADFNA Principal Property Taxpayers Current Year and Niue Years Ayo Pvrceel of Parraat of Tana Cily Total City Total Tarabla Total Tarable Atsnrad Atw+wd Aasersed ASseaud Prona+tf'0''aer Valaatloa Vdaadov Vslaatloa Valvatloa Kaiser Ponndahan Health Plan lac. S 203,319.161 0.98% 5 191,072.654 2.00% Pasco Co"alloldfmPl.LC 127,391,704 0.61% SSR Puaca Colorado LLC 106,2U6,848 0,51% 0.00% Pruadalp Towws LLC 104,I64,646 0.50% - 0,00'A Equity Office Properties Trust 10,537,991 0,50% _ 0.00%Archstove Smith operating T� 95,133.577 0.46% 43,888,832 0.48% Pwak.lnc. 77,914,178 0.38% - 0.00 . C,,,, City Cencera Crown City Center LLC 75,234,474 0.36% 0.00% EWALLC 71.198.279 0.34% 000% Calatada A,awriates 621621 col 71,001,644 - U.34% 0.00% - 1C0,16A,6W 1.13% Spieber Properties 009Y° 76,989,600 0.84% 2ML Pusadena T'oweta LLC 0.00% 62,064,953 0,65% One Colorado A%soaiotes - 0.00% 59,739 A20 0.6% Ralph M. Parsons Campmy 0.00%57,353,719 0.63% A4en' netmuuo CmPtnW+ion 0.00% 56,613,107 0.62% Aetna Life lasuranm Company 0.00% 53, 0.5 KwvPasudens luveatntemt PaMrtship - 0.(YYs'o 4349%385 93387 0S0% Teachers lnsur.-,a& Annuity Aawciotimi Taal Principal pmpady VWINC S 1035,102,107 4,91111 3 749 462 17 3,20% 1: KPWYgy 1p1w AAeo;ed The amoanla shown abovc incdade m oessed value daze fin both 0ae City and the Redevelopment Agency. oats is only presented for the top ten Ptepertfes in each of 0te two years Preacaled. Suareet California Municipal Slaligdi , lac. 38 Appendix G: City of Pasadena Principal Income and Expenditures, 2002-08 Fiscal Years CITY OF PASADENA Changes In Fund Balaneea of Covernmen W Funds Last Seven Flxal Years (,nodiliM amvul6nls of acrnn,thia3 On d,w�arMe) Rcvenaec Taus Licenses oral permits lnlergm•ernrnerWN revenues Charges furseniocs Fines and forfeits lnvenmem eandrrgs Net charge in fair value of mvestumms Rental income M1liscellaneons te.•emres Contributions Forgnrness of advances Total resrmres Expentlitures: elnrem: Gcn-ral gos•e w Public safety Tmsuporlalion Sanitation Health Culture and leisure Conmluaity developrrme Capital OWay Debt smke: Prirrcipnl Mun,,ent Imerest Bond issuvncc cons Payment In refunded bond escrow agent Total cxperediusres L•ncess (defrcicrrcy) of reveaues over (ural r) cxpendilpres Other Onancing wnrces (uses); Discount on debt issued ]sauame of long•tcrm debt Payrcent m refunded bond wrowagsni Transfers In Transfers out Tmnsfors to component units Transfers from component units Tote) other financing sources (uses) Net change in Bond balances Debt sepia as a percentage of oou:apital cW dimres TOW 4 2982 2003 24M 2005 2006 2007 2006 $109,190 120,839 129,111 130,053 136,783 150,497 156.373 5,647 7,333 7,386 9,438 9,185 7,121 S,646 39,370 43.799 53,974 64,173 56,485 60,304 57,S11 27,692 2903 25,299 32,358 34,653 37,892 39.088 4,379 4,120 5,425 6,542 7,080 7,758 8.025 20,341 21,469 25,066 22,970 24,970 30,192 28,311 912 399 (1,351) (288) (2,096) 2258 1.019 4,418 4,502 4,931 4,870 4,867 4.991 5,370 3.934 S,707 7,949 ISMS 11.316 3.756 7,894 4326 2,346 21560 2,382 4,336 7,292 6,005 2 900 219,909 24_1 827 263,250 217,546 289,099 317,-4)SI 318.282 24,733 25,788 25,939 27,261 31,037 34,717 35,124 60.529 64,139 69,450 77,965 MAI 92.713 96,211 26�392 27,655 29,822 3LO12 33.923 34.193 36.717 2063 2.669 2.739 2,409 3, 104 3,109 3,189 9.927 91960 10,840 10,727 11,430 12,247 12,124 20,477 21,364 22,095 21,912 24,293 23,518 26,S21 30,172 32,324 38.543 35,142 37,059 38,032 39,682 13.460 16,370 33,803 38,786 75,111 60„902 34,999 8.507 10,702 10,488 53,054 12.322 12,296 41,972 25,298 29,055 30,630 29,577 $1,557 35,212 34,165 912 1.408 121,569 240_139 274,399 328,8a5 343_105 348c959 36j _ (I.659) , 4,639 (11,13 41,299 (55, 0QG) (31.908 (4�722 (210) - (36) - 336 27276 73.790 40,168 42,932 17,S42 87 27,939 (21.604) (38,527) - (5,186) 62.130 77,173 92,042 134,570 136,408 109,124 112.228 (52.941) (61.160) (64,035) (116.132) (112.144) (99.825) (%.215) 0.499) - - - - 291 1_1,653 89_593 19,659 61,320 36,674 9.386 41,788 S 9,994 94.2$2 8�519 _j!LM 18 3327 (22,522 2,066 16,2'A 17.3% 17.1% 28.5% 16.4% 16.5% 23.4% 7ne L7fy ofposadand he's elecled m shoo only sevan3r!drsofddtd for this scheduIs, 39 Appendix H: Ten Year office Vacancy Rate History, City of Pasadena 40 Pasadena All Classes Historical Summary 41 X. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This was a collaborative effort between the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce and many, many individuals ercial office , leasing the Pasadenaareawho metlnvolved in over the courseo ten months to discuss, consider andf formument in late this report. I would like to especially acknowledge the help and support of Steven Marcussen of Cushman & Wakefield, David Saeta of IDS Real Estate Group, David Nazaryk of Trammell Crow, Colleen Carey of Coldwell Banker Commercial North County, and Ross Selvidge of CB Richard Ellis. Each of these individuals provided important information, advice and support during the formulation of this report. I would also like to specifically thank Susan Pai of Jones, Lang, LaSalle an Pasadena Towers for hosting nearly a year's worth of meetings. In addition, I am very grateful to the following who provided input into the formulation of this paper: John Archibald, Dale Brown, John Martin, Betty Ma, Carole Henning, Greg Nasser, Peter Knell, Herb Aceves, Carlton Maese, Javier Gomez, Bob Riegel, Victoria Chua, Jennifer Ledda, Ki Ryu, Rachel Felton, Bill Cutler, Lance Sandman, Brian Foulger, Nate Carlson, Kinden Mitchell, Deborah Luedy, Nico Vilgiate,. Lito Nazareth, Lance Bird, Bill Ukropina, Chip McCorkle, David Kutzer, Lisa Bailor, Leon Saroff, John Pipia, Norman S. Mitchell, Malissa Valdez and everyone who contributed their time and efforts to meet, discuss the issues and provide input into this report. Thank you all. Paul Little February, 2009 42 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:34 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Rezoning Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office] nhoustonCcDsanta-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Jan Livingston [mailto:jansam96@sbcglobal.netj Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 12:10 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Rezoning Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Sent from my iPad Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:34 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: City Council Meeting Agenda Item 75(D) Opposition to Current Project Proposed at 2525 North Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Officel nhouston0santa-ana or¢ 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 A 2020 D SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Ellen Koldewey [mailto:mrskold@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:46 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Cc: Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra@santa-ana.org Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Item 75(D) Opposition to Current Project Proposed at 2525 North Main Street Greetings Mayor and Councilmembers, Request for Council Action in City Council Meeting Agenda Item 75(D): I continue to oppose the development at 2525 North Main Street of the 256-unit multi -family project on the 4.4-acre site with 180 Parking spaces on approximately 1.4 acres to be shared by residents and the Discovery Center. I ask that you vote for option 1 in Agenda Item 75(D). Adopt the resolution affirming the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny the followine annlicafrons: Development Agreement No. 2018-01; General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; and Amendment Application No. 2018-10 establishing Specific Development No. 93. Further, do not adopt the resolution certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031), do not adopt the findings of fact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations, or adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Do not vote for option 2. 2A) Do not adopt the resolution certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 20 t8-01 (SCH No. 2018021031), adopting findings of fact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopting a Statement of overriding Considerations, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2B) Do not adopt the ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2018-01; 2C) do not adopt the resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; and 2D) do not adopt the ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-10 for Specific Development No. 93. Information Reported in the Record in Support of the Modified Plan Remains Incomplete, out of Date, and/or Inaccurate Here are some of the issues in the current record still requiring clarification that constituents have already brought to the City's attention: - the financial benefit now estimated to accrue to the City from this project in terms of average annual revenue and gross general fund revenue is now substantially less than originally predicted; wit, particularly the some of the acreage to hive impact on te Discty and overy Centerr andtlability remains modificat modifications o Main Street betweor en Walkie Way and Edtgewoodticipated - the height is still equivalent to a six -story building; - the environmental impact of the now approved Main Place Mall is still not evaluated; - the mandatory Environmental and Transportation Advisory Committee (ETAC) recommendations to Council to preserve or remove city trees may not all be included; and - the term/duration of the Development Agreement is still not described consistently. Reasons for opposition to Current Project/Support for Responsible Development The changes made in this project since the last time the Council considered it are not substantial. Significant problems with this project remain. The people of Santa Ana do not need to settle for this misplaced, high density, outsized housing project. It is not necessary or helpful to your constituents, including those in need of affordable housing, to crowd this space with too many apartment units. As the units of the project will be priced too high to alleviate overcrowding in Santa Ana, the project will only increase the density of our City's housing. The real mistake is thoughtlessly abandoning our City's General Plan, which our Planning and Building Agency's Executive Director has aptly called the "City's Constitution." We are haphazardly rezoning piecemeal based on the wants of an individual developer rather than a coherent appraisal of what is in the best interests of the City of Santa Ana. I would like to seek a project for this property that will enhance the cultural uses of the property's neighbors on the North Main Street corridor — the revitalized and transformed Main Street Mall, the Bowers Museum, the Santiago Park green spaces, and the Discovery Science Center. This portion of North Main Street should be developed as a premier business location that is part of the exciting and inviting entry to our City already underway, that can be used and enjoyed by all in our City. I greatly appreciate and strongly support he need to attract new development to our City but believe that the adjusted record at 2525 Main Street shows that the financial benefit to the City by this developer in terms of new general fund revenue will be significantly less than originally anticipated. and will not justify the very real harm that it will do to our City. Conclusion In conclusion, I am an individual voter, and home owner who for over twenty years has lived less than a mile away from this proposed development in a neighborhood that will be severely and irreversibly damaged by the decision to rezone and overbuild this parcel of land. I ask you to act in the best interests not only of the surrounding neighborhoods, and of Ward 3, but of our entire City. Together, we can do better. Think of the City's future. Continue to require complete and sound answers to the many important outstanding questions you and your constituents have asked about this proposal. Vote against this development. Thank you for your service to our City. Respectfully Submitted, Mrs. Ellen Koldewey Santa Ana CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:33 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhoustonPsanta-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Denise Chaudoin [mailto:chaudoin46@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:18 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 main Street No rezoning for 2525 main Street it's bad for santa Ana. Please vote no Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:33 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: I oppose the current plan for 2525 North Main St Kind Regards, Nicole Houston ] Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 r 2020 j SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Mark Hay [mailto:mnhay2000@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 6:42 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: I oppose the current plan for 2525 North Main St Hello Mayor Pulido, My name is Mark Hay, I am a resident and home owner at 316 Edgewood Rd, Santa Ana, 92706, in the Park Santiago neighborhood. I oppose the current proposed plan for apartment development at 2525 N. Main St in Santa Ana. 1. The density is higher than is reasonable for our neighborhood, for this part of Santa Ana, and specifically for the intersection of Main St and Edgewood Rd. This intersection is already affected by heavy traffic between lam -gam and 4pm-6pm, rush hour drive times. 2. Environmental Impact Reports by the developer 1 for this project have failed to take into account the effect on traffic of the high density apartment developments that are currently being built around the intersection of Town and Country Rd and Lawson Way in Orange, immediately to the north of 2525 North Main. They have also failed to take into account the high -density developments that are planned for the area that is currently Main Place Mall. All these developments will create a significant increase in traffic along Main St at the intersections of Main St. and Edgewood Rd. and Main St. and Memory Lane. Main St. and Memory Lane is the next major intersection 2 blocks north of Main St and Edgewood Rd. These two intersections currently experience high traffic during the hours of 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm. 3. Environmental Impact Reports have taken NO REALISTIC ACCOUNT of the effect the 2525 N Main development will have on PARKING IN and TRAFFIC THROUGH Park Santiago neighborhood, along Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara, for apartment residents desiring alternate access to 17 St, and the 22 and 55 fwys. Edgewood Rd, Santiago St., and Santa Clara are all 2 lane roads with homes on both sides. There are a lot of children in our neighborhood as well as Hoover Elementary School on Santa Clara. Thank you, Mark Hay 316 Edgewood Rd Santa Ana 92706 2 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:32 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: NO NO NO 2525 N Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 M 2020 �SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Nancy Smith [mailto:nancy@smithtribe.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:05 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: NO NO NO 2525 N Main Street "Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street." 1 Salas, Diana From: Flores, Rosa Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:32 AM To: Flores, Dora; Gomez, Daisy, Mitre -Ramirez, Norma; Orozco, Norma; Salas, Diana; Tran, Max Cc: Houston, Nicole; Cruz, Yesenia; Morris, Angie Subject: Support letter for 2525 N. Main Attachments: CMO SCAN_20191119_100317.pdf See attached letter to Mayor and Council received today regarding 2525 N. Main Street. Regards, Rosa Flores City Manager's Office X5222 CRIME SURVIVORS PVU uhee Ce;'l, a AWARENESS I PREVENripN I I prr..IIJS November 11, 2019 Santa Ana City Council 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988, M31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Mayor and Council Members, My name is Patricia Wenskunas, I am the Founder/CEO of Crime Survivors Inc. My group has gained national renown for our advocacy on behalf of the victims of violent crime and we are dedicated to the idea that with community support, respectful advocacy and hopeful healing, one can survive a violent crime, and thrive in their personal lives. The mission of Crime Survivors is to provide hope and healing to victims and survivors of crime through advocacy and the support of resources, information, and empowerment from the critical time after a crime occurs through the challenges and successes of surviving and thriving. My civic involvement extends well beyond Crime Survivors. I was one of the early proponents of California's Victim's Bill of Rights known as "Marsy's Law," a state constitutional amendment that was passed into law by California's voters in 2008. I am the Founder and former CEO of Orange County Crime Stoppers, an Advisory Board member at Ca1VCP, an Advisory Board member at Crime Victims United, a Board Member for The Children's Advocacy Center, and a Past Board Member of California Crime Stoppers. As an engaged, informed and active member of this community, I believe that progress is the key to creating safe communities. The under-utilized building located at 2525 N. Main Street is serving no one in this community and I believe a rezone should be approved. This type of vacant building, attracting nothing but crime and decay, becomes a core for criminal behavior and creates a strain on ever -important city services. Conversely, the benefits to the community of redevelopment at this site are vast: • The development will pay into affordable housing fund (HOO) approximatley $3mm. • The development will bring more than $500k annually to the City's general fund. • This particular area has a very high concentration of homeless and vagrants at the adjacent park and this area of Santa Ana has seen a significant increase in crime. Having a new beautiful community at the park with a full time presence, will serve to mitigate many of the current issues that plaque the park and this community. • We are deep in the midst of a housing crisis, and Santa Ana in need of 25k more housing units, of all types. (844) 853-HOPE Santa Ana, CA 92705 info@crimesurvivors.org Twitteccom/crimesurvivors (949) 872-7895 0 PO 80x 54552, Irvine, CA 92619 O www.crimesurvivors.org �.@ Facebook.com/crimesurvivors I nstagra m.com/crimesurvivors CRIME SURVIVORS P0-"oWVz AWARENESS I PREVENTION I-+4;LII�u It is my understanding that the development team has revised the development numerous times in an effort to work with the community and additionally has now will provide permanent parking for The Discovery Science Center. The Discovery Science Center and the education it provides is an important educational tool in OC. The development team will renovate portions Santiago Park at a cost of over $ lmm. All of the above give rise to better living conditions, safer communities and more revenue to help those in need. It is critical that Santa Ana protects the edges of communities to allow sites to go into disrepair will erode these important areas. To this end, I would like to submit this letter of support for the development at 2525 N. Main Street, Santa Ana. Respectfully, Patricia Wenskunas Founder/CEO Crime Survivors Resource Center "1 (844) 853-HOPE Santa Ana, CA 92705 %' 0. BOX 54552, Irvine, CA 92619 \ m info crimesurvivors.or www.crime.urvivors.org Twi[ter.com/crimesurvivors . @ Facebook.com/crimesurvivors (949) 872-7895 PO I nstagra m.com/crimesurvivors Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:32 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main St. Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston(cDsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: T Sherman [mailto:nothingbutfun@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:57 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main St. Mayor Pulido, Please do not allow the city to rezone the 2525 Main St. property. With the multitude of housing under construction or already approved for construction within walking distance of this of this property, utilizing this site for a greater good within existing zoning parameters will add to the benefit of the city. Hoping you will aid in striking this project. Do not allow this project to be how your legacy will be viewed. Thank you. Tony Sherman 2408 N Riverside Dr Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:32 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhoustonpsanta-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Irma Jauregui [mailto:irmapj@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 8:15 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <1Villegas@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Councilmember Jose Solorio <jsolorio@aol.com>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org>; Phil Bacerra <phil@philbacerra.com> Cc: Joshua (Jamie) Eftekhari <joshua.eftekhari@gmail.com>; jen3126@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: 2525 N Main Street Honorable Mayor and Councihnembers We in Wilshire Square stand with our neighbors to the north and ask with urgency not to rezone the property. We need a quality business development on north Main Street to support economic growth that both the city of Orange and the great expansion Main Place will be having can support. There are hundreds of dwellings already planned and being developed as of today, the impact of housing on that particular property will be detrimental on many levels and open a precedent that cannot be undone. Will other developers then be able to force your hand with a lawsuit if the city doesn't give in? We urge you to listen to your residents and protect them for the well-being of all Most respectfully, Joshua Eftekhari Jennifer Schutza Irma P Jauregui Wilshire Square Sent from my iPad Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:31 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Irma Jauregui [mailto:irmapj@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:06 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Councilmember Jose Solorio <jsolorio@aol.com>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Phil Bacerra <phil@philbacerra.com> Cc: suzie sandoval <suzie.csandoval@gmail.com>; Abigail Alvarez <aalvar1223@gmail.com>; Jose J Rea <josejrea@gmail.com>; Chris Schmidt <chris714oc@gmail.com>; Dora Lopez <Iopez4080@yahoo.com>; adolfosierra@sbcglobal.net; Ginelle Gmail Hardy <ginelleann@gmail.com>; Selica Diaz <selicadiaz@yahoo.com>; Lisa Tran <lisat65@sbcglobal.net>; RaulRamos55@gmail.com; Vivian Martinez <Mmamaflip@aol.com>; 302santana@gmail.com; fpzaldiv@uci.edu Subject: Fwd: 2525 N Main Street Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers The Santa Ana Healthy Neighborhoods Alliance unites in opposition with our neighbors and associations to the north in the rezoning of 2525 N Main. We stand united with a NO vote on the rezoning. We are the densest city in the county and one of the densest in the nation.. We support effective and strong economic development on our Main Street. Rezoning is not the solution. As our elected officials we urge you to establish reasonable economic growth and development, and protect our neighborhoods that will be impacted with over - development in their neighborhoods. With the expertise of the City Planers and their team, we request that other models for economic growth and development be created within the current zoning laws, and presented to the community for our input. The city's Strategic Planning documents over time are founded on community engagement in the decision making process. We urge you to adhere to this standard that was established with the city partners and resident teams that created these documents, and the Council approved. We urge you to vote NO, and consider more effective and creative models for economic growth and development within the current zoning structure. Most respectfully Irma P Jauregai , Co -Chair Santa Ana Healthy Neighborhoods Alliance 2 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:31 AM To: eComment Subject: PN: 2525 N Main st Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.orx 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Jimmy [mailto:moriorinvictus@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:14 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N Main st Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Salas, Diana From: Sent: To: Houston, Nicole Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:29 AM eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston(@santa-ana.orx 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Sonja Melching [mailto:sonjamelching@att.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:04 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N Main Street Dear Santa Ana Council Members, I am a Floral Park resident writing to urge that you do NOT change the zoning or general plan for 2525 N. Main Street, Santa Ana. This will set a horrible precedent that could potentially destroy the future of single-family neighborhoods in our city. To maintain this location as a business use property could potentially bring more jobs to the area, and will not cause undue traffic and parking hardships to the surrounding residential neighbors. To Mr. Solorio specifically, you represent this area. We, the residents of this Ward are high -turnout voters. Should you (and/or any other council members seeking to pursue the office of Mayor) continue to forward the agenda of the developer, either by asking them to revise their plan once again, or to vote in any way that enables multi -story residences in this location, you can be sure that these surrounding neighborhoods will not cast our votes for you. Please stand up for your constituents. Thank you for your time. Sonja Melching 2205 N Heliotrope Drive Santa Ana, CA Saias, Diana From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Please see attached email Janet Basalone <janetbasalone@gmail.com> Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:04 AM eComment RE: 2525 N Main on City Council Agenda 11/19 November 18 City Council.docx November 18, 2019 Dear Santa Ana City Councihnembers: The Santa Ana Planning Commission has twice rejected the proposed projects at 2525 N. Main. The residents most affected by the previous and current proposals remain adamantly opposed to this development. It remains abundantly clear that the proposed development is not consistent with the zoning requirements for 2525 N. Main, nor is it an appropriate project next to a residential neighborhood. The Santa Ana City Council, must consider the long-term impact for Santa Ana's current and future residents. Changes to the General Plan to fit incoming investors is not an appropriate reason to place a high -density building alongside a residential neighborhood. It has been a long battle that has united this community's voices and votes .Giant projects will negatively impact our children's safety, our traffic in our neighborhood as well as on Main Street, and our overall quality of life. I am so proud to be a part of the Park Santiago community that has not given up. Please vote "No" for this proposed project at 2525 N. Main, and "No" to changes to the General Plan. Respectfully, Janet C Basalone Park Santiago Resident Salas, Diana From: Bill B <billbonnett@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:48 AM To: Fregoso, Vince; Kelaher, Selena; eComment Cc: North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance NSAPA Subject: Fwd: EIR COMMENT: 2525 Main St. identified as being in a liquefaction zone, yet appropriate Geologic study not performed Dear Vince and Selena, Below are a number of concerns that residents of Park Santiago and advisors have in regards to the geologic studies performed on 2525 Main Street Residential Project. I submit these concerns to be formally on the record, on these items, as the EIR has NOT been certified, and as a result, comments regarding concerns about the EIR are still allowed. These concerns could be subject of further action as the project evolves. Regards, Bill Bennett To the Santa Ana Planning Department Regarding: The 2525 Main Street Residential Project. EIR related to Geology Studies Concerns. 11-19-2019 at 9:45AM The first geology study that was performed is too general to certify the project is safe from liquefaction. The second (Geosoils, 2017) might suffice as a seismic hazard study, however, it was certified as a soils study. Does Geosoils, 2017 have sufficient accuracy, scope, and depth ? Park Santiago's legal advisors don't believe so and will be sending formal comments to City. Only professional geologists or civil engineers are qualified to decide or put their seal on that decision, and therein lies the problem - there have been NO independent reviews of the report by engineering professionals with expertise in that area. The developer commissioned the Geosoils report preemptively, handing the highly technical report's assessment to overworked planning staff, not engineering professionals with expertise in that area. This lack of professional review has led to misconceptions and the omission of critical information. When a bridge is engineered, the highest water levels are used to guide its design. So it is with buildings and the ground that support them. The hi hest historical groundwater levels are used to calculate liquefaction risk and guide recommended mitigation. The facts in support of findings for Section 9.6.1.3 mistakenly cite a collection of past low groundwater depths as evidence of lack of seismic risk, missing the only figure of importance in calculating liquefaction risk - the historically highest ground water level of 30 -40 feet for this site (Plate 1.2 Historically Highest Ground Water Contours and Borehole Log Data Locations, Orange 7.5 minute Quadrangle, California). Most concerning is the omission of the mitigation recommended by the Geosoils 2017 report. The Results section of the Liquefaction Analysis (Geosoils 2017, Appendix B Liquefaction and Settlement Analysis, page 4) states: "...the potential for liquefaction on the proposed tract poses a low risk to site development, assuming the conclusions and recommendations provided are incorporated into the fmal design and construction of the project." The low risk assigned is dependent, it assumes the recommended mitigation is being followed. Recommendations (Geosoils 2017) Removals "The subsurface exploration revealed that the existing fill and upper five feet of the alluvium are unsuitable for structural support. This unsuitable fill and alluvium should be removed to competent native alluvium in the areas of proposed development and replaced as compacted fill. Removals should be excavated down a minimum of five feet below proposed grades and extend a minimum of five feet laterally..." (Geosoils 2017,page 11) Deepened Foundation Recommendations "it is anticipated deepened foundations will be utilized for the parking structure... driven piles are not recommended due to the gravelly/ rocky layer encountered at the depth of 40 feet." (Geosoils 2017, page 11) Review and Inspection "All foundation and bottom excavations shall be observed by an engineering geologist or a geotechnical engineer prior to the placement of any steel to verify that the proper foundation material has been encountered... Department of Building and Safety Inspector should also observe the excavation. The final result of the lack of a formal engineering review by professionals with specific expertise in relevant areas is that: The EIR is missing an entire section - Geology and Soils. The Facts in Support of Finding for sections 9.6.1.3 "Exposure to Potential Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death - Seismic -Related Ground Failure, Including Liquefaction" and 9.6.3 "Soil Stability" contain substantial errors and omissions. The Finding for both 9.6.1.3 and 9.6.3 is erroneous. It should read: Finding: Less than significant impact with mitigation. The mitigation summary chart should be modified to include the mitigation recommended in Geosoils 2017. Regards, Bill Bonnett Salas, Diana From: Kelaher, Selena Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:38 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Published article from Voice of OC published 11-19-19 Attachments: Voice of OC 2525 Main Street Residential Project article published 11-19-19.pdf Selena Kelaher, AICP City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency I M20 20 Civic Center Plaza I Post Office Box 1988 1 Santa Ana, CA 92702 skelaher@santa-ana.org I Direct Phone: (714) 667-2740 From: Bill B [mailto:billbonnett@gmail.comj Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:30 AM To: Fregoso, Vince <VFregoso@santa-ana.org>; Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Subject: Published article from Voice of OC published 11-19-19 Hello, Please include today's article from the Voice of the OC in the documents for the 2525 Main Street Residential Project. Regards, Bill � DONATE NOW SANTA ANA Santa Ana City Council Set to Vote Today on Controversial Apartments Proposal JULfE LEOPO, Voice ofOC Lawn signs in Park Santiago neighborhood in Santa Ana. ByBRANDON PHO(HTTPsr//VOICEOFOC.ORG/AUTHOR/BPHO/) I hour ago Santa Ana City Council members today will decide the fate of a controversial apartmenr complex proposal, one that's mobilized the opposition of nearby homeowners, who say the project is still too large to move forward despite much downscaling by the developer. Today's vote comes after more than two years of protests and uncertainty among city officials and residents surrounding the project, which oromotad numerous revisions (hugs://voicwfm org 2019/08/Dromsed-aRmmenu-in-north-sans-ana-stiR-onDosed-bv.residents-despire- sgdsi to it by developer Ryan Ogulnick and his team at Vineyards Development Corp. Over the last two years, Oguhtick has shrunk the scale of the planned building at 2525 N. Main St. — located in the city's Park Santiago neighborhood — from an early iteration of more than 500 proposed apartments to now 256 apartments. Ogulnick at community meetings and in previous statements to Voice of OC has said his company has never downsized a project to this extent before. "The developer has made some concessions," said City Councilwoman Ceci Iglesias in a phone interview. "The concerns residents have cxpressed, according to the information we received from staff, have been addressed." https://volcoofoc.org/2019/11/santa-ana-city-council-set-to...m=email&utm term=O_6100bOe74b-069cBOBf74-279679229 11119/19, 8:26 AM Page 1 of 3 But residents in the nearby area remain worried the projea's density would still be one of the highest in the city next to single-family homes, on top of a current plan for 511 parking spaces — an average of two parking spaces per apartment. Since Vineyards submitted its initial proposal in October 2017, the City Council has sent the project back to the Planning Commission, which in turn has rejected the project on three different occasions. "It's wrong in so many ways, this project.°said resident Dale Helvig, who helped organize the neighborhood's opposition to the project. Helvig's group, known as the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance, has mobilized die projects critics to turn up to City Council meetings in large numbers. He said members of his group and residents from all over the city will be at tonight's meeting. "Throughout the process, Ogulnick has attempted to appease homeowners with promises to spend over $ I million on improvements and maintenance of the neighborhood's park, as well as hiring 24-hour security to patrol around the building and the entire Park Santiago area. It remains to be seen how the Council will vote. Today's meeting will be the first one for newly -elected candidate Phil Bacerra, who previously ran for and lost the seat in the 2018 election cycle. That year saw around $320,000 in dark money spent in the election — pan of which was in opposition of Bacerra. Bacerra over the phone declined to say which way he was leaning on the project, Voice ofOC revio reposed (hnp •// f rg/2018/l1/ to 'ga' g s t ou - thaLMumd-170000-t m- _ l /1 that the campaign committee that handled the dark money spent against Bacerra was managed by a Northern California resident with family connections to a Santa Ana lobbyist for the 2525 N. Main St. project. Ogulnick has repeate y e ie n involvement with the dark money gr=p ttps://voiceofoc org/2018/11/state- investi gati ng-secretive-group-that-ro uted-170000-to-Santa-ana- election/) Bacerra — who has since been elected to the seat in this year's special election following the tesienation of his former oo�pnent Roman R�yna (h /hoiccof /ant vnai r�-ae h'e 'a .I/) — has in the past said he wouldn't have supported the project for its location in Park Santiago, while indicating there would be better sites for it in other parrs of the city N this YouTube video from hi = 'gn pa Vie• 1Sios//www.vaut He also in this year's special election got the endorsement of Park Santiago resident and former council member Rob Richardson, as well as former council members Tom Lutz and Alberta Christy, who are all opposed to the project, https://voiceofac.org/2019/11/santa-ana-city-council-set-to...m=email&utm term=0 6100b0e74b- 069c808f74-279679229 11/19/19, 8:26 AM Page 2 of 3 Richardson, Lurz and Christy — along with fellow former council members Dan Griset, Lisa Mills, and Brett Franklin — sent a letter this week to Mayor Miguel Pulido and the rest of the City Council urging them to strike down the apartments plan. "In our experience, the number of development issues that have had this level of opposition and consistent advocacy over the past 30 years can be numbered on perhaps one hand," the council members' letter reads. It goes on to describe the potential precedence the project's approval could set. "Should you decide to approve an unwanted project after all that has transpired over two years ... the larger consequence of putting the corrupting campaign money ahead of the quality of our neighborhoods is significant." It continues: "Who among you will stand up for Logan, Sandpointe, Santa Anita, Wilshire Square, French Park, Saddleback View, Memorial Park, Washington Square or any other neighborhood you could name when their turn comes to battle an unwanted development backed by corrupting campaign money from dark sources and out of town interests?" Now that Bacerra's filled the vacant Ward 4 seat, Helvig said "it removes the possibility of a tied vote and sending it back to the Planning Commission a fourth time." Helvig said the project — on top of its controversial nature — has "turned heavily into Santa Ana politics," adding that the Council's upcoming decision on the project could determine "how were going to deal with these situations going forward" "If it comes down to how much money a developer has to throw at issues," he added, Santa Ana neighborhoods "are going to lose." Brandon pho it a Voice of OC intern. Contact him at hp&eca)voiceQ&cffg (madmAnhowoiav—& err) or on Twitter @photherecord https:pvoiceofoc.org/2019/11/sania-ana-city-council-set-to... m=email&utm term=0_6100bOe74b-069c8o8f74-279679229 11119/19, 8:26 AM Page 3 of 3 Salas, Diana From: Sent: Jeff Brumett <jbrumett@nat.com> Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:28 AM To: Iglesias, Cecilia; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Solorio, Jose; Penaloza, David; Sarmiento, Vicente; Pulido, Miguel; eComment; villegas@santa-ana.org Subject: No on 2525 I encourage you to vote NO to resining g at 2525 N. Main Street. Santa Ana can and should do better! - Jeff Brumett Senior Account Manager jbrumett@nat.com Main:: (800) 464-6282 Cell: (949) 338-3502 Fax: (818) 551-5332 http://www.nat.com/JeffBrumett North American Title Company ❑ 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 190 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 http://www.nat.com 0 WARNING! WIRE FRAUD ADVISORY Wire fraud and email hacking/phishing attacks are on the increase! If you have an escrow or closing transaction with us and you receive an email containing Wire Transfer Instructions, DO NOT 0 You have received this e-mail due to a past or current transaction or as a result of our efforts to keep you in touch with current developments affecting your industry. If you wish to unsubscribe from any future general information mailings, please click here. Salas, Diana From: Sent: To: Subject: Members of the City Council, ron phulps <rphulps@sbcglobal.net> Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:19 AM eComment Agenda item 75-D November 19th meeting As a long time resident of West Floral park, I'm opposed to the rezoning of 2525 N. Main Street. Ron Phulps Olive Lane Salas, Diana From: Kelaher, Selena Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:09 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Attachments: MAR2525OBJ11182019.pdf; 2525EIR.pdf; PasadenaOfficeAnalysis.pdf Selena Kelaher, AICP City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency I M20 20 Civic Center Plaza I Post Office Box 1988 1 Santa Ana, CA 92702 skelaher(d.santa-ana.org I Direct Phone: (714) 667-2740 From: Mark Rothenberg [mailto:markllaa@me.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:47 PM To: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> Cc: Fregoso, Vince <VFregoso@santa-ana.org>; Carvalho, Sonia R. <SCarvalho@santa-ana.org>; Storck, Lisa <LStorck@sa nta-a na.org> Subject: Re: 2525 Main Street Ms. Keleher: Please fmd a supplemental letter of objection to the 2525 North Main Street (Magolia) project, my original letter of objection, and a study by the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce of the positive impacts associated with office development. Kindly provide these materials to the City Council and add my objections to the project into record of the proceedings. Many Thanks, Mark A. Rothenberg, Esq. Ms. Selena Kelaher Page 2 of 6 last meaningful modifications to the Economic Element to the General Plan took place in the late 1990s. By eliminating over three hundred thousand square feet of commercially designated space before completing the General Plan update, the City loses the ability to cogently and coherently plan for development. The amendment of a General Plan is a legislative decision It would be entirely reasonable for the City to deny the application as opposed to engaging in piecemeal planning without a comprehensive and current understanding of both economic and development trends on a Citywide basis. Failure to Consider Economic Implications of the Loss of Office/Commercial Space The applicant and EIR assume that a 387,465 square foot office building may be built onsite pursuant to the existing zoning and General Plan designations. Although this size is debatable, it is shocking that the City would move forward on the basis of the applicant's financial projections without commissioning a study of the economic benefits associated with a comparable commercial buildout. Assembling the data supportive of such a study is not particularly difficult. In 2009, the City of Pasadena Chamber of Commerce prepared a study advocating for the preservation of office space. In addition to numerous one-time permit fees, the Chamber estimated that a 250,000 square foot building dramatically improve the local economy both in terms of direct tax revenue and secondary economic impacts. In contrast to residential development, the impacts to municipal services would be significantly lower for office. An excerpt of the study follows and the study itself is attached: f Fora 250.000 square foot office building:] Business license fees would bring $3,750 for the building itself and an additional $58,000 in business license fees for enterprises in the building. The 250,000 sf, building averages $687,500 in annual payments for electricity and $375,000 for other local utilities. That usage generates $134,000 in utility user taxes, again not including taxes paid on telephone and other communications services. That same 250,000 sf. office complex would generate approximately $50,000,000 annually in salaries and gross receipts of $125,000,000. The operations within the complex can be reasonably estimated to generate an additional. $87,500,000 in salaries paid to supporting workers throughout the region and $231,250,000 in additional receipts in the region. The 1,000 workers in the building can be estimated to spend a small amount of their wages in local businesses, as well. Reasonably, $2,640,000 can be conservatively expected to flow into the local economy as a result of casual spending by office workers in a 250,000 sf. Complex. That is 501/o of the already conservative average local expenditure of $110 per office employee, based on Ms. Selena Kelaher Page 3 of 6 2004 data compiled the International Council of Shopping Centers. This would include money spent on lunches and dinners, casual shopping and other miscellaneous spending, including gas purchases, but not services such as dry cleaners or health club memberships. See, "The Case for Commercial Real Estate: Office Building A Strong Economic Future for Pasadena, "htt ://ww2.cit 2f asadena.net/trans/TAC%20REPORTS/060409/ITEM 4A 060409 'rAC.PDF.ndf (Last visited, November 15, 2019). Given that the Pasadena Chamber prepared these estimates in 2009, it is highly likely that the figures would be considerably higher for an office building that is 35% larger than the 250,000 square foot office building evaluated by the Pasadena Chamber. Brown Act Violations The Project has been revised such that a portion of the site will be bifurcated and made subject to a long-term cross -parking and use agreement with the Discovery Cube of Orange County. Neither the staff report nor the proposed final EIR provide a meaningful analysis of the impact of pedestrian flow across Main Street during the museum's operational hours and the project notices have not been revised to reflect that a portion of the Discovery Cube's operations (parking) will be incorporated into the Project. Put simply, museum parking is significantly different than residential parking and the interrelationship of the two sites is not adequately noticed nor explained. The failure to do so constitutes a violation of the Brown Act. Because the parking lot constitutes an accessory use of a different primary user (the Discovery Cube), the act in designating parking for the museum onsite should be specifically noticed and analyzed. Re- configuring access to Park Santiago should also be separately noticed. Pedestrian ingress and egress across Main Street attributable to parking should also be carefully analyzed. Development Agreement/Violations of City Code & Charter/Brown Act. The Developer's removal of certain concessions from the Development Agreement given the Planning Commission and neighborhood's refusal to get on board with the development program (e.g., withdrawing a commitment to install neighborhood monuments) strikes me as petty. It is also clear to me that staff could have/should have negotiated a far better deal. For example: the term of the Development Agreement is four (4) years with two optional one (l) year extensions. See Development Agreement Section 2.4.1. The cost for exercising an extension is $50,000. It is unclear if the $50,000 is a one-time payment for two years or if it were contemplated that the developer would pay $50,000 per each one-year extension. The staff report also indicates this sum was intended to make the City whole for lost revenue. This is inaccurate. The Development Agreement indicates that the funds are only intended to recover a portion of the City's loss. The financial projections for the Project (which are themselves entirely questionable) purportedly indicate that the City stands to gain in excess of $464,000 per year following construction. It is therefore unclear why the Development Agreement only requires a $50,000 extension payment for two years. Ms. Selena Kelaber Page 4 of 6 The proposed Development Agreement provides legal recognition to a series of largely private commitments, provides a number of entirely uncertain/vague promises of future action, delegates powers to City employees in violation of the City's Charter, and facilitates public contracting of public spaces without meaningful notice. Examples of some of the defects in the Development Agreement follow: • Section 3.6.1 provides a protocol by which the developer will submit covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CCRs) to the City Attorney for review and "approval" without Council consideration. The review criteria is limited to whether the CCRs conflict with the Development Agreement, General Plan, and development conditions. However, the City Charter does not give the City Attorney authority to "approve" CCRs. See Section 703 of the Charter. Section 3.6.1 does not provide any opportunity for public input or Council input. • Section 4.2.1 (a) requires the developer provide and maintain public art valued at .5% of the design, engineering, and construction costs for the Project. This provision does not indicate where the art will be installed, how the calculations of value will be determined, and whether and how the Council would approve the submission. Given that no plans have been submitted, such art has not been reviewed/evaluated commensurate with the EIR and aesthetic impacts associated with the project. • Section 4.2.1(b) delegates the management and construction of unspecified improvements to Park Santiago and appears to violate both the Brown Act and public contracting requirements. • Section 4.2.1(c) provides for benefits given solely to the Park Santiago neighborhood including private security patrols, street -light enhancements, decorative concrete, and graffiti abatement. Although the developer should agree to these items (which could have been part of an overall settlement with the neighbors and private covenants), they are problematic as they appear to convey private benefits to a discreet/defined area without public input. Even assuming this were appropriate, why are such benefits not being conveyed to Floral Park, West Floral Park, Washington Square and other neighborhoods south of 17'h street that will also be impacted by the Project? Although the City may take the view that public funds are not being expended, the reality is that such concessions constitute a portion of the overall value of the Project to the City, are being provided in an attempt to mitigate impacts, and are classified as being "public" in nature. • Exhibit H to the Development Agreement identifies a public park (Park Santiago) as being within the private roving patrol area. The adoption of a subsequent security/patrol regimen requires both public input and review per the Brown Act and appears to delegate policing to a third party. Ms. Selena Kelaher Page 5 of 6 Section 4.8 requires the developer submit an overcrowding mitigation plan. This is surprising and constitutes an implicit admission that the City's current Code and processes are ill equipped to regulate usage levels in apartments. Nevertheless, the Development Agreement does not provide for any compliance measures beyond the provision of such a plan and does not allocate resources for enforcement (an item that should have been negotiated). • Section 4.9 requires the developer to develop a local live work plan and entrusts the City Manager with approval. The Section does not appear to mandate compliance -merely that the plan be submitted. Section 501 of the City Charter does not authorize the City Manager to approve such plans. The same concern is evident for Section 4.10 (local sourcing plan). • Section 6.1 requires the developer to submit an annual monitoring report. No parameters for such a report are given. Section 7 does not provide adequate remedies beyond termination of the Agreement. For example, the Agreement should specify that upon termination, owner may be required to conform the property to applicable changes to the Code or cause the prior zoning to revert. Spot Zoning/Contract Zoning As set forth in my prior correspondence, the Project constitutes an example of impermissible spot zoning. The final proposed FIR attempts to sho-fly this problem away by explaining that there are no other properties zoned Professional Office in proximity of the site. Therefore, the EIR concludes that the selected zoning is appropriate. Put another way, the I IR attempts to answer a negative with a negative. There are however commercially zoned properties to the north of the site. There are no similarly situated high -density residential developments adjacent to the project site. Given that the developer has lauded the project as being for luxury apartments, there does not appear to be a compelling public policy justification to support unlawful spot zoning in this instance. Ambiguities in the Development Agreement also give rise to a contract zoning claim. While the City is statutorily permitted to enter into development agreements in exchange for agreeing to zoning concessions, it is questionable whether concessions in a development agreement must be clearly stated and refined as opposed to vague and obtuse promises of future plans and actions that the public is not made privy to. It is therefore evident that the City's approval of the Project in reliance on the subject development agreement and conditions will be susceptible to claims of unlawful contract zoning. As a land use professional, I respectfully submit that the Council's approval of the Project would be: Ms. Selena Kelaher Page 6 of 6 • Entirely short-sighted; • Premised on unrealistic financial projections that have already eroded and been undercut due to projections of loss of taxable property value to adjacent properties; • Made without the benefit of a fully updated General Plan; and • Deprives Santa Ana residents of what could be a vibrant economic engine and resulting high paying jobs. Given the legal and practical infirmities associated with the Project, I respectfully urge the Council to deny the application. Please further refrain from referring the matter back to the Planning Commission. Alternatively, please consider generating a comparative economic analysis of the positive impact of an office development and defer consideration of the item until after the new year. Respcctfq4y Submitted, Mark A. Rothenberg Mark A. Rothenberg, Esq. 2042 North Ross Street Santa Ana, California 92706 September 12, 2018 VIA US MAIL & EMAIL Ms. Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Planning and Building Agency City of Santa Ana PO Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 Re: Letter of Objection/Comments/Magnolia at the Park/Draft FIR (State Clearing House No. 2018021031-Santa Ana DP No. 2017-34 Dear Ms. Kelaher: Please add this letter to the record of the proceedings for the above captioned project. As a threshold matter, I respectfully request the City enlarge the review and comment period on the draft EIR (EIR) by an additional ninety (90) days. A substantial portion of the review and comment period occurred during the end of the summer holidays where families are returning from vacation and the last several weeks fall during the Jewish High Holidays of Rosh Ha Shama and Yom Kippur. I also respectfully request that the City's certification of the EIR take place following the new year and that Council not consider the matter during or proximate to Thanksgiving, Christmas, or New Years. In addition, the EIR is lengthy, complex, and will have dramatic and long-standing impacts on the City. Therefore, the public should be afforded sufficient time to review its contents. In support of the assertions in this letter, kindly note that I have resided in Floral Park since 2011. In addition. I have nearly twenty years of experience as a land use attorney having practiced land use law in Florida and California. A good deal of my experience has been on behalf of large commercial and residential developers. I also have the privilege of serving as an adjunct professor of land use law at Chapman University Law School. In sum: the project dramatically over -develops a site that has, for nearly a hundred years of recorded history, been complimentary and supportive of adjacent single- family residential communities. The project subordinates adjacent neighborhoods to the blight associated with an overly intensive, under -parked, and aesthetically uninteresting, r The undersigned solely represents himself as a property owner and resident of Santa Ana. development. Put simply, the City of Santa Ana risks losing a valuable opportunity to support an area -wide economic revitalization on a marquis parcel of property. I. Site Overview The 2525 Main Street project ("Project') is situated on 5.93 acres of property located at the Northeast corner of Main Street and Edgewood Road. The property has historically served as a transitional buffer between the Park Santiago Neighborhood consisting of approximately 1,100 homes built between 1899 and 1970 with a number of homes on the City's historic register. The site has historically been used for light commercial and office uses since the 1920s. The Santa Ana (now Orange County) Register reported over the years that the site was utilized as a grocer, auto repair, and chapel/mortuary. A two-story office building was developed on the property in 1981. 11. Development Proposal. The Project attempts to shoehorn 405,000 square feet of high -density residential development containing 496 rental units onto the 5.93 acre project site. This results in a density of 83.6 units per acre. The Project is supported by a 9 level parking garage consisting of 904 parking spaces (1.8 spaces per unit). III. Spot Zoning. The Project constitutes an example of spot -zoning. Spot zoning occurs where the City creates an island of one type of use that has significantly greater development rights than surrounding properties. See, e.g., Foothill Communities Coalition v. County of Orange, 222 Cal. App. 41h 1302 (Cal. App. 4u Dist 2014). Although spot zoning is not necessarily unlawful, the City must make a finding/provide a compelling justification for spot zoning. For example, in Foothill Communities, the court determined spot zoning was appropriate to accommodate a senior housing project Creating a cloistered/gated apartment community with sparse setbacks is entirely inconsistent with established development patterns in the immediate area and creates an island of high -density residential development in an area that is otherwise comprised of benign office development and a well - established historic single-family neighborhood. It is likely the applicant will respond by arguing that the project is not spot -zoning because it is commensurate with densities contemplated for projects adjacent to the Main Place Mall. However, such projects are located across a 6 lane highway and are approximately 1,000 feet away. IV. CEQA Violations/EIRDefects The following constitutes an overview of significant errors that cloud the entire proceeding and reflect what appears to be carelessness by the applicant and the information provided to the City's EIR consultant. It is my sincere hope that the City's Planning staff will require a comprehensive staff level review, re -write and re -circulation of the draft EIR. A. Missing Objectives. As a threshold matter, the California Environmental Quality Act requires the City to commission a disinterested report that carefully evaluates the environmental impacts of a project. A cornerstone of this evaluation is a clear articulation of both the Applicant and City's collective objectives. See CEQA Guidelines, Section 15124(b). The project is therefore reviewed to determine the degree to which the project and/or alternatives meet these objectives. The applicant's objectives are of course obvious: the development of its proposed residential product. By contrast, the City's objectives are to be gleaned from, among other sources —the General Plan. Unfortunately, the Draft EIR cherry picks objectives that drive the analysis to policies encouraging the development of housing but give passing lip service to elements of the General Plan requiring due consideration of economic preservation and development. The EIR adopts the following objectives: • Redevelop existing underutilized parcels to implement development of new high - quality housing. • Increase hie -quality housing near existing employment centers. • Promote an improved jobs/housing balance by locating attractive new housing in proximity to employment centers. • Provide housing in close proximity to commercial areas, freeway, and transit. • Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways. • Implement capital investment to enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability pursuant to the City of Santa Ana Strategic Plan. • Provide a safe, high -quality, modem residential community with open space and various recreation amenities. (Emphasis added). The EIR should include objectives designed to review the project against the economic impact associated with a loss of office or other valuable commercial space. Support for such an objective can be found in the Economic Element of the General Plan and the Economic Development provisions of the Strategic Plan. The Element establishes that the City is uniquely situated to compete for a diverse range of businesses due to its location and proximity to John Wayne Airport. The Economic Element (which is as relevant today as when it was adopted) requires the City evaluate projects to determine whether (among other things) they: Increase employment opportunities for local residents. Maintain and enhance the diversity of the City's economic base. Increase Santa Ana's share of the regional economy. Data provided in the EIR indicates a nominal level of economic development associated with the instant project but does not provide any meaningful assessment of the economic impact associated with removing office or other commercial space from the City. B. Lack of Project Alternatives The EIR also fails to provide a reasonable list of project alternatives. The EIR compounds the error by not providing an accurate description of the scant alternatives provided. CEQA requires the City consider a reasonable range of alternatives. Of course, the fact that some of the alternatives may not be as profitable or that the applicant overspent assuming it would receive its entitlements for high -density residential should not be considered when evaluating the feasibility of alternatives. See e. ., Preservation Action Council v. City of San Jose, 141 Cal. App. 4 t 1336 (Cal. App. 6' 2006). In that case, the court stated: An EIR's discussion of alternatives must contain analysis sufficient to allow informed decision making.... Without meaningful analysis of alternatives in the EIR, neither the courts nor the public can fulfill their proper roles in the CEQA process.... `To facilitate CEQA's informational role, the EIR must contain facts and analysis, not just. the agency's bare conclusions or opinions.' An EIR must include detail sufficient to enable those who did not participate in its preparation to understand and to consider meaningfully the issues raised by the proposed project ... It is the [agency f s responsibility to provide an adequate discussion of alternatives. That responsibility is not dependent in the first instance on a showing by the public that there are feasible alternatives. If the lagencyj concludes there are no feasible alternatives,_ it must explain in meaningful detail in the EIR the basis for that conclusion. (Emphasis added). The EIR provides three alternatives. These alternatives include: • A no -build alternative; • Reduced project alternative; and • Build out of the existing zoning alternative. Although CEQA does not require an exhaustive review of alternatives, there are a number of feasible alternative projects that could be developed onsite. By way of example, the current zoning of the property supports 11 different uses. Similarly, the General Plan designation supports either an overlay or specific zone. Less intensive retail, office, or residential development should therefore also be evaluated. The burden is on the Applicant and not the public to demonstrate that these proposals are not feasible. The EIR compounds the problem associated with a lack of alternatives by not providing accurate or sufficiently clear descriptions of the alternatives themselves. For example, the reduced build alternative fails to provide any analysis as to how, whether, and why the parking structure and setbacks would be reconfigured and onsite amenities would be eliminated as opposed to re -configured. Moreover, no analysis is provided as to how the 30% reduction in density was selected for analysis and review. By way of example, the developer and City could and should review the project with a 50% and 75% reduction in units coupled with a meaningful analysis of impacts to design. If such alternatives are rejected because they are not feasible, the record must establish why. Again, the fact that the applicant may have overpaid in expectation of discretionary approvals for high -density residential development is unavailing. The third alternative (build out of the existing zoning alternative) is not accurately described. The FIR identifies the buildout at being a 3-story building consisting of 387,465 square feet requiring 1161 parking spaces. No data beyond a recitation of setbacks is provided as to how this particular design would be permitted as of right. By way of example, there is no discussion regarding the impact of the City's Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements. Moreover, given the proximity of the property to an adjacent single-family community, the City's Code would appear to limit at least a portion of the building to two stories. See Santa Ana Code Section 41-314 (C). C. Misapplication of Urban Design Element. The EIR also proposes a number of justifications for the development of a residential high-rise onsite and the rejection/dismissal/down-grading of alternatives. For example, the EIR states, "The General Plan... identifies the project site as the Main Street Concourse node on Figure 7 of the Urban Design Element describes that this area is intended to function as a major activity node and that the area represents [a] great opportunity for the establishment of a cohesive, height intensity, mixed activity center with a strong presence in the region." It is unclear whether the subject property itself is within this node because the Urban Design Element does not provide specific boundaries or parameters beyond a mere circle. It further appears that the area within the node does not include the subject site nor the adjoining Park Santiago neighborhood. However, it is disingenuous to reference let alone place any meaningful importance on the designation because the excerpted sections of the Urban Design Element in the General Plan discuss a massive mixed activity center located offsite (known as the Main Street Concourse) that was never built. The EIR should at a minimum clarify that the Main Street Concourse node designation was premised on the development of a massive mixed use/activity center planned between 1990 and 1997. At that time, the City had considered development proposals for a (then) 500 million dollar project consisting of luxury homes, a 32 story office tower, retail, movie theater, conference center, and a monorail station. The site has since been developed with a smaller office building and retail uses. Put simply, the opportunity of blending the subject site in with an established mixed activity center consisting of a monorail link, convention center, and various other uses (including single family) is no longer possible. At a minimum, the City should consider refraining from placing reliance on this provision of the General Plan until the next update. Even assuming it was appropriate to reference the Main Street Concourse node designation (it is not), the City's Urban Design Guidelines require a meaningful analysis of how a project protects existing/established neighborhoods. The FIR casually dismisses the project's impact either because it is of a comparable or lower height than an office building located beyond the heavily forested Santiago Creek or developments on the opposite side of Main Street. The EIR's casual treatment of the impacts associated with the development (notably the discussion regarding project impacts associated with Urban Design Element Goals 2 and 4) should be revisited and neither rely on development in accordance with the Main Street concourse node or the office building located a significant distance from the project site. This is so because the office building (again being on the other side of the Santiago Creek) is not located immediately adjacent to an established single-family neighborhood. The project site of course is. D. Underparked/Aesthetic Design. In my opinion as a resident of Floral Park and having represented developers before, it is clear that the City's parking requirements and the project proponent's assessments are invalid and require further assessment. Residents of Floral Park have the privilege of paying for parking permits. The parking permit program was established due to a number of adjacent apartment projects lacking sufficient parking. Given the housing concerns identified by the proponent, a number of apartment buildings in the area are over -utilized. This means that a one bedroom may house more than one family. It would also be disengenous to dismiss these concerns as being appropriate subjects for code enforcement. Housing violations are routinely ignored or as a practical matter, difficult to enforce given the unwillingness of tenants and guests to cooperate. Aesthetically, the project is uninteresting. The project consists of a series of monoliths representing an attempt at a "modern" design that results in a project entirely out of scale with its neighbors. There are also no meaningful contours or other softening architectural features that would seamlessly integrate the project with historic homes situated within the Park Santiago neighborhood. Candidly, this type of design is often selected by developers because it is significantly less expensive to build in contrast to a building containing a diverse mix of aesthetic features and curvature designed to be complimentary with existing uses. E. Traffic. As a resident of Santa Ana, who drives north and south on Main Street every day in the area immediately adjacent to the site, I offer the lollowing observations: My average commute time from the immediate area utilizing Main Street to the 5 to the 55 South has been (on average) 30 minutes and commute times have been increasing. As set forth above, staff should require a comprehensive assessment of various alternatives assuming either the existing zoning or an overlay accommodating either mixed use (with a significant density reduction) or other commercial zoning districts. The analysis should provide a comparative assessment both in terms of AM/PM peak hour trips and vehicular traffic in the evenings and on weekends. Put simply, while an office may have a higher AM/PM peak, offices generate virtually no traffic beyond 6PM and on weekends/holidays. By contrast, a residential project generates trips 24/7/365. It is also unrealistic to assume that residents will commute via mass transit. Again, these assumptions appear to be premised on the installation of a monorail which had been promised as part of the Main Street Concourse plan. No such system was built. In my experience, although a small fraction of residents may rely on busses, the bulk of residents will utilize cars. This is precisely why an office should be developed because it promotes existing residents to work in the community within which they already reside. V. Conclusion. The area immediately adjacent to the project site is comprised of one of the hidden gems of Santa Ana —the Park Santiago neighborhood. As a land use professional, I was stunned at the intensity of use proposed for the subject property given the nature of the City's zoning and land use scheme. It is evident that the proponent believes the City is desperate for revenue and has advanced a series of financial projections that are either unrealistic or do not take into account the long-term damage of depriving the City of a viable business hub. The subject project may be appropriate in the City's downtown core. However, the subject site was clearly contemplated to serve as a transition/buffer between the Park Santiago neighborhood and Main Street corridor. In my personal opinion, the project is poorly planned and poorly conceived. I respectfully request the Planning Commission and City Council deny the application outright. At a minimum, the EIR should be dramatically revised and re -circulated as a draft for Planning Commission review. Given the timing for the EIR's circulation, I must respectfully reserve the right to supplement these comments. Sincerely, // Mark A. Rothenberg Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Jennifer Sterett [mailto:thesterettfamily@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:36 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan <VVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Please vote no on this project. Some of you are on the way out of office by choice. Others may be on the way out depending on this vote. Some of you don't care about Park Santiago as you have demonstrated before with your comments about this project, and some of you have actually taken the time to listen to the residents' logical and emotional pleas and concerns for not only this neighborhood, but for anyone who travels up and down Main Street or uses the 5 freeway. You all know who you are. Do the right thing, and make the right choice. Don't be fooled by the developer's statements. He will renege on his word and sell that complex as soon as he can, and it will turn into an eyesore just like the rest of the overdeveloped and run down apartments that besiege our once great city. Sincerely, Jennifer Sterett A resident of PS for 20 years Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 North main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza l Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Alan Pollack [mailto:alanjoel@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 9:59 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 North main NOIIIIIIi M Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: No on rezoning Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: melonpicker [mailto:melonpicker@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:11 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: No on rezoning Please vote no on rezoning 2525 n main. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: No on rezoning Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston(cpsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020.,, SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: melonpicker [mailto:melonpicker@sbcgloba[.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:10 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: No on rezoning Please vote NO on rezoning 2525 n main. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: No to 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Chelsea Rambo [mailto:crambo615@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:17 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: No to 2525 Hello all, First of all thank you for taking the time to read this email. My name is Chelsea and I moved to Park Santiago in 2017. My husband and I are new home owners and love the neighborhood as well as the city. I unfortunately can't be at the meeting tomorrow but wanted to voice my concern. Being a 20something homeowner is a huge accomplishment these days. Let alone in Southern CA. We currently have a 2 year old daughter with another on the way and hope to remain here for many many years to come. However, if this development is approved, not only will we likely lose equity in our home but we will probably shorten our time here and potentially move cities. I am all for more housing for the community but not in the form of high density apartments. Not only that, but less than a mile away are 2 huge new developments popping up. Besides home value, this project will greatly effect the traffic. It is a current nightmare and will only worsen. I also fear that with added people comes added crime to our neighborhood. Being on Spurgeon with 2 young daughters, I will not stand for that. I honestly could go on and on but I beg of you to hear what the people have to say and make the right decision to vote against the proposed apartment complex. Sincerely, Chelsea Bezjian Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:34 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Letter Comncerning Opposition to 2525 N. Main Proposal Attachments: 252511-16-19 rr.pdf Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Officel nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 M 2020 S SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Rob Richardson [mailto:rob.richardson@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:37 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Letter Comncerning Opposition to 2525 N. Main Proposal Mayor Pulido, Please see the attached letter from your former colleagues. All the best and keep fighting! Rob Richardson I Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please do NOT approve rezoning at Town & Country Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Barbara Doyle [mailto:barbarafdoyle@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:18 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please do NOT approve rezoning at Town & Country I have lived in Floral Park for three years -and have watched the rest of the city of Santa Ana become more dangerous, more congested, and less appealing as a place to live. Is that the legacy you want as Mayor? Please help the city by finding ways to upgrade it, not by making it the over -crowded dumping ground of Orange County. Thank you, Barbara Doyle Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:35 AM To: eComment Subject: Fw: 2525 N. Main Street Santa Ana Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Susan Semotan [mailto:susan.semotan@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:48 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street Santa Ana Dear Mayor Pulido, The proposed high density apartments being planned at 2525 N. Main Street, Santa Ana, will be detrimental to the Park Santiago Neighborhood and to the surrounding areas. No changes in the developer's plans will change our opinion that high density apartments for this area are completely wrong. Please keep this area zoned for business only, as it is zoned in the City of Santa Ana's General Plan. Sincerely, Susan and Steve Semotan 601 East Buffalo Ave. Santa Ana 92706 Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Marisol De La Torre[mailto:marisol.d.castillo@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:14 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Please vote NO to rezoning the 2525 N. Main development project. This would not be beneficial for Santa Ana. Thank you, Marisol Castillo Lifetime Santa Ana resident Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Sent: To: Houston, Nicole Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM eComment Subject: FW: Please vote NO on the rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647,5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: FERNANDO POSADA [mailto:silfer95@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:13 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO on the rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Hi, Mr. Pulido: It was great to meet you at the meeting yesterday at Santiago Park. Thank you! Femando Posada Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston i Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston a@santa-ana.orx 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Jim Stewart [mailto:jimandsuestewart@roadrunner.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:15 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street Please VOTE NO on 2525 N. Main Street proposal) Sue and Jim Stewart 529 W. Santa Clara Avenue Santa Ana sent from Mail for Windows 10 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote no on rezoning 2525 N. Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: patricia cote [mailto:patricia.cote@att.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:27 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote no on rezoning 2525 N. Main Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Development Attachments: 20190129_153316jpg;20190129_153318jpg;20190129_153323jpg Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhouston(@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza [Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Allan Ruiz [mailto:ar-yankees@outlook.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:37 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Development In the City of Santa Ana, bordered by 4th St., Cabrillo Pk. Dr. / Cabrillo Park The 1-5 fwy. and a conglomeration of condos. Acres and acres of leveled prime land. Been there for years. No residential tracts nearby, no nothing. No complaints. Easy access to roads & freeway. Why doesn't this developer take interest here? It makes more sense. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please Vote NO on Prop 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 Can . 4°t� �4•7� 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Richard Payne [mailto:payneless2@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 8:00 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please Vote NO on Prop 2525 Dear Mayor and Council Members, I'm asking you to take the long view of this proposed project. Do not not let your legacies be defined by ignoring the huge traffic and negative quality of life impacts this will have on residents of the Neighboring Communities and Wards you represent. You wouldn't want yourselves, your families or friends having to deal with the problems this will create if passed and neither do the majority of taxpayers in the city. Santa Ana has to quit opting for a quick buck here and there and work with developers and companies that bring lasting value and improved quality of life as the leaders of Costa Mesa, Irvine and Newport Beach do. Only by making selective quality decisions will Santa Ana begin to gain the respect it deserves. Please Vote No. Respectfully yours, Richard Payne Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Bonnie Schmidt [mailto:brsbonbon@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:08 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Please vote no on rezoning 2525 main. Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.ora 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2.020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Bonnie Schmidt [mailto:brsbonbon@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:07 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO on 2525 main st rezoning. Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston i Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Ernesto Estrada [mailto:estrada.ee@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:26 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 N. Main Street Bad for Santa Ana Sent from my Whone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Rezoning at Park Santiago 2525 Edgewood Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Managers Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Jacqueline Herrin [mailto:j3andcle@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:33 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Rezoning at Park Santiago 2525 Edgewood have enjoyed living in Park Santiago since 1976. Please vote no to rezoning. Do not destroy this beautiful neighborhood. Sincerely, Jacqueline Hess 2528 Fairmont Av Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhoustonPsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza 1 Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020� SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Doreen McCarthy [mailto:doeadear99@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:52 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote no to rezoning 2525 N. Main Street. Thank you, Doreen McCarthy Floral Park resident Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:37 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Opposed to 2525 N. Main Kind Regards, Nicole Houston i Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston cpsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza i Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Darcie L. Cancino [mailto:darcielc@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:38 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Opposed to 2525 N. Main Honorable Mayor, This is to once again urge you to deny the development agreement for the parcel located at 2525 N. Main St. This development remains too dense at 58 DUA, is disharmonious with the existing neighborhood, will generate significant traffic congestion on Main Street, and will result in an explosion of cut -through traffic on Park Santiago streets. Santa Ana residents, not only those of Park Santiago, remain overwhelmingly opposed to this project. We have spent countless hours reading thousands of pages of documents, attending numerous City Council and Planning Commission meetings, and remain steadfast in our opposition for the aforementioned reasons. Please respect the decision your Planning Commission has made twice and reject this proposal. Respectfully, Mrs. Darcie L. Cancino 909 E. Grovemont St. Santa Ana, CA 92706 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:36 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhoustonPsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 M t 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Christine Switzer [mailto:switzer.christine@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:49 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street, Chris Switzer, Concerned Floral Park Resident 1 Salas, Diana From: Carmen <ortizccc@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:14 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Solorio, Jose; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; Iglesias, Cecilia Cc: eComment Subject: 2525 N MAIN STREET -PLEASE VOTE NO ON REZONING Councilmembers, We are residents of Park Santiago for 25 years and ask that you please vote no on rezoning 2525 Main Street. Thank you for your consideration. Carlos & Carmen Ortiz Salas, Diana From: kelly.medina@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:10 AM To: eComment Subject: Opposition to 2525 N Main proposed plans To Whom It May Concern: I would like to register my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property at 2525 N. Main St.. I ask you to vote against rezoning and against the developer's present proposal to build a high density apartment building there. The proposed development is located at an already -narrowed strip of Main St., and its projected placement on the lot is too close to the traffic lanes, preventing the possibility of any future widening of that section of the street. This would disallow any future rail lines/trolley going to Main Place to even fit there. Barring your support of maintaining present zoning (which as my ward representative I cannot imagine that you in all conscience would), I ask you NOT to approve the present proposed design. It is too much for such a location, especially since there are so many new developments already in the works within one half mile of it. There are way too many dwellings for such a location so near one-story homes. Its style is completely out of character for the neighborhood. It's too tall, and it's too boxy, lacking any of the architectural beauty or character that our neighborhood has. The proposed extra parking for the Discovery Science Center is also problematic, as I see it. Cars turning into it would have to slow down right in front of cars barreling off of the freeway offramp. Those cars would have to suddenly slam their brakes on, creating potential accidents. Also, people behind them would then easily wind up missing the green light (it's "no turn on red" there-- but many do turn, regardless), and traffic could back up even onto the freeway. In addition, that parking lot's entrance/exit is where people turn right from Edgewood Rd onto Main. They would suddenly have to deal with those entering/exiting, and be hindered from turning --or turn and suddenly have to stop--, causing back-ups for getting out of the neighborhood. Crashes would also likely increase because of little space to visualize cars coming out of the lot. We had similar problems when the bus stop was located there. It was moved North in order to alleviate the problem. I have no opposition to keeping the property as a commercial development. It has been that way for as long as I can remember, which is at least 50 years. Surely, there is a need for modem medical offices so near to St. Joseph's Hospital, for instance. For all of the above reasons, I ask you to vote against changing the zoning. That would stop all the other possible problematic permutations that would follow such a change. In addition, I would like to have the voting put off, unless the newly -elected Councilmember Becerra can be present to vote. Thank you for your time. Kelly Medina French St. Blessings, Kelly Blessings, Kelly Blessings, Kelly Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:44 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: NO on 2525! Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza ISanta Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Debra Curran [mailto:debra@curranonline.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:42 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: NO on 25251 There are already another approved 1,900 Apartment Units, to be built less than 1/2 mile from 2525 Main St. We are not opposed to this. But the 2525 project was never evaluated with all this other high density housing in close proximity. We DO NOT HAVE the infrastructure to support another development (2525) this much in such a small area and so close to single family homes. Main Street will not accommodate all the addition traffic and it WILL divert through our neighborhood. Stop this developer's opportunistic money grab (to pay for his bad investment decision) that will leave our neighborhood "holding the bag and dealing with the impact of too much development on not enough land. NO REZONING. You and the developer get to walk away and WE have to deal with the long term consequences. Thank you. Debra Curran 2646 Oakmont Ave Santa Ana, CA 92705 Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:43 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 N. Main Street Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: AT&T [maiIto: btony@att.net] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:46 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: RE: 2525 N. Main Street Project Please say "NO" to this project ---it is not good change for this location. Continue to keep Santa Ana clean and beautiful. So far, you are going good --I do like to drive by and see clean streets!!! Keep up the good work. Thank You B. Nunez & Family Park Santiago Resident that not only benefit our own self interests but also the interests of our neighbors and community. The 2525 project would benefit the city in added revenue and increased housing, but it would not benefit the neighborhood, just like my backyard cell phone tower plan. Please consider the long term health of our city and neighborhoods by rejecting the 2525 re -development proposal just as the city planning commission has. Thank you, it is my joy and honor to live in Santa Ana and sit under your leadership, Matt Doan, Santa Ana resident for 17 years 415 E. Santa Clara Ave. Santa Ana, California 92706 Matt Doan Pastor of Outreach (Global and Orange County) Calvary Church Santa Ana mdoan@calvarylife.org 714.550.2378 www.calvarylife.org Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:43 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: No on 2525 please Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza J Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Kelly Reinberger [mailto:newsjunkie@hotmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:15 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: No on 2525 please Dear Mayor Pulido, In our own neighborhood of Floral Park, we spill out to the northeast corner of the city at what is appropriately called "The Orange Crush." This high -traffic, congested section connecting three freeways and two cities has one tiny parcel of natural landscape left on Memory Lane, along the Santa Ana River. Large apartment buildings and and expanding senior care facility on Memory Lane are already going to choke up this narrow, winding street. On the other boundary, Town and Country has brand new apartment buildings not yet occupied. The thousands of vehicles that would pour onto this corner of our city would make traffic unbearable. And with the river, there is no way to widen Memory Lane. Most traffic from 2525 would most certainly snake through the peaceful neighborhood of Park Santiago all day, every day. I urge you to vote no on re -zoning this parcel of land. Planners carefully thought out this zone. Sincerely, Kelly Reinberger Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:43 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhoustonPsanta-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020� SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Melody Cerra [mailto:quiltermelody@gmail.coml Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:19 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please say no to rezoning 2525 N Main. Melody Cerra 2128 N Victoria. Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:42 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza l Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Michael Conradson [mailto:mikeconradson@me.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:21 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Please vote NO Sent from my Wad Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10.42 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's office) nhouston()santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Justin Koppelman [mailto:jrkoppelman@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:24 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra@santa-ana.org; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: Hello all, I'm just emailing to express my sentiments regarding the possible rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Please vote NO to the proposed rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. I am also not in favor of the demolition of the First American Title Insurance Company Building. I do not believe that demolition is in alignment with the provisions of the City's own General Plan that affirms the value of historic preservation to the local economy and quality of life in Santa Ana. Thanks to all of you for the work you do on behalf of the Santa Ana community, Just Koppelman Resident of Santa Ana Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:42 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Tracey [mailto:traceyellyn@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:25 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Hello Mayor Pulido! I am against the 2525 Main St development project. This will add undue burden to our streets and greatly devalue the property around it. Please vote to reject the project. Thank you! Tracey Stein Resident, Floral Park Salas, Diana From: Sent: To: Houston, Nicole Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:38 AM eComment Subject: FW: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston@santa-ana.orR 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 lam 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Anne Alex [mailto:amljalex@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:05 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Thanks for your support on this important issue. Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Anne & Courtland 2323 N Westwood Ave Santa Ana, CA. 92706 Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:38 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please vote No Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Office) nhouston@santa-ana.org 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 of Snn,p 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Jace Eckert [mailto:jace.eckert@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:25 PM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please vote No Dear Mr Mayor, Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street, Thanks, JC Eckert Sent from my iPhone Salas, Diana From: Plantamura (US), Michael <michael.plantamura@boeing.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:56 AM To: eComment Cc: Plantamura (US), Michael Subject: City Council Meeting November 19, 2019 Agenda Item 75D 2525 Main Street Project I want to bring to the attention of the City Councilmembers and the City of Santa Ana that this project if approved creates a significant safety issue and traffic problem with the redesigned intersections at Walkie Way and with the addition of a new driveway adjacent to Edgewood Road and the 5 Freeway off ramp. The new driveway will be located too close to the Edgewood Road intersection with Main Street. This will cause potential safety concerns with cars speeding to make the light, ignoring the no turn on red requirement from the 5 freeway off ramp, cars turning right onto Main from Edgewood Road, especially if there is the setting sun in their eyes, and cars making a u-turn on Main to get to the shared parking lot. Be forewarned that if the City approves this design they are setting themselves up for a potential lawsuit in the future. I respectfully request that the City Council vote NO on this project and the rezoning. Too dense, traffic problems and unsafe. Michael Plantamura Manager Boeing Commercial Airplanes Service Engineering— Flight Controls Mechanical Hydraulic (FCMH) Systems (562) 79 7-34 71 (desk u) (562) 243-2886 (cell ® ) Diana From: Sharon Forquer Bonnett <sharon2323@ymail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:34 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment; pbacerra@santa-ana.org Cc: Kelaher, Selena; Fregoso, Vince Subject: Opposition to revised 2525 Main St project To City Leaders, As a 15 year resident of Santa Ana, I oppose the 2525 Main St project in its revised form- there are commercial options for this space and the revised plan still goes against the general plan. We need professional jobs in North Santa for our residents and our college students. The approximately 4,000 apartments approved and being built in this 1/2 mile radius is enough apartments for the area especially given that Santa Ana has a significantly higher density than most CA cities- WE HAVE DONE OUR PART in providing apartments and housing in this county and our state... The density is much higher than any apartments approved next to RI zoned properties On the residents of Santa Ana's behalf, you can do better than approving this project - we do not need, nor should we, approve every project a developer brings to us- it still needs to fit the parcel's purpose, zoning and the general plan. Vote NO on this project and do the right thing for Santa Ana residents. Sincerely, Sharon Forquer Salas. Diana From: Charlotte Finklea <cfinklea55@gmaiI.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:33 AM To: eComment Subject: 2525 N Main St Dear Santa Ana City Council, I am writing today to say that I am not in support of rezoning of 2525 N Main St. Sincerely, Charlotte Finklea 2408 N Louise St Santa Ana, CA 92706 Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:30 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Please oppose 2525 N Main present project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston [ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office I nhouston0santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 G y ot�un+a�3w 2020 SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: kelly.medina@yahoo.com [mailto:kelly.medina@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 10:56 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org> Subject: Please oppose 2525 N Main present project Honorable Mayor Pulido: I would like to register my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property at 2525 N. Main St.. I ask you to vote against rezoning and against the developer's present proposal to build a high density apartment building there. The proposed development is located at an already -narrowed strip of Main St., and its projected Placement on the lot is too close to the traffic lanes, preventing the possibility of any future widening of that section of the street. This would disallow any future rail lines/trolley going to Main Place to even fit there. Barring your support of maintaining present zoning (which as my ward representative I cannot imagine that you in all conscience would), I ask you NOT to approve the present proposed design. It is too much for such a location, especially since there are so many new developments already in the works within one half mile of it. There are way too many dwellings for such a location so near one-story homes. Its style is completely out of character for the neighborhood. It's too tall, and it's too boxy, lacking any of the architectural beauty or character that our neighborhood has. The proposed extra parking for the Discovery Science Center is also problematic, as I see it. Cars turning into it would have to slow down right in front of cars barreling off of the freeway offramp. Those cars would have to suddenly slam their brakes on, creating potential accidents. Also, people behind them would then easily wind up missing the green light (it's ,no turn on red" there-- but many do turn, regardless), and traffic could back up even onto the freeway. In addition, that parking lot's entrance/exit is where people turn right from Edgewood Rd onto Main. They would suddenly have to deal with those entering/exiting, and be hindered from turning --or turn and suddenly have to stop--, causing back-ups for getting out of the neighborhood. Crashes would also likely increase because of little space to visualize cars coming out of the lot. We had similar problems when the bus stop was located there. It was moved North in order to alleviate the problem. I have no opposition to keeping the property as a commercial development. It has been that way for as long as I can remember, which is at least 50 years. Surely, there is a need for modern medical offices so near to St. Joseph's Hospital, for instance. For all of the above reasons, I ask you to vote against changing the zoning. That would stop all the other possible problematic permutations that would follow such a change. I would be interested in meeting with you personally sometime before the 19th in order to discuss your position. Please let me know when would be convenient for you. In addition, I would like to have the voting put off, Becerra can be present to vote. unless the newly -elected Councihnember Thank you for your time. Kelly Medina French St. Blessings, Kelly Salas, Diana From: Houston, Nicole Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:29 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: 2525 Main Street Project Kind Regards, Nicole Houston I Executive Assistant City Manager's Offices nhouston0santa-ana ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 202Q SANTA ANA COUNTS This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Laura Guzman [mailto:2]auraguzman@gmail.coml Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 11:07 AM To: Pulido, Miguel <MPulido@santa-ana.org>; Sarmiento, Vicente <VSarmiento@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Solorio, Jose <JSolorio@santa-ana.org>; Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>; Iglesias, Cecilia <Clglesias@santa-ana.org> Subject: 2525 Main Street Project Good morning Council Members, I am a Park Santiago Home Owner/Resident. I am reaching out to you to voice my complete opposition to the proposed 2525 Main Street project. Please vote "No" tonight, as this project is wrong for the location. Please forget about "politics as usual", and listen to the residents of Santa Ana. Thank you, Laura Guzman Saias, Diana From: Masa Fujitani <mkfujita@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 4:54 PM To: eComment Subject: NO "Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street." Masa K. Fujitani Salas, Diana From: Steve Orosz <steveoeg57@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:06 PM To: eComment Subject: Magnolia at the Park - 2525 N Main Street - The Addington Attachments: 111819 OEG Comment Letter to Santa Ana CC.pdf Attached is a comment letter directed to the City Council for the subject project. Thank you. Stephen Orosz PE, PTOE, CFM OROSz ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. PO Box 2934 PREScoTT, AZ 86302 Cell: 805-680-1586 email: steveoeg57@gmail.com `oeG oroszengineeringgroup November 18, 2019 Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council Members Santa Ana City Council 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: Magnolia at the Park — The Addington —2525 N. Main Street, FEIR Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and Members of the City Council: OEG Ref 19-702 Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG) has prepared the following comment letterforthe subject project. We have reviewed the Traffic and Circulation analysis prepared for this project at the request of the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA). We have prepared and reviewed over 200 Traffic Impact Analysis and Environmental Impact Report sections on Transportation and Circulation over the past 38 years (32+ years in the Southern and Central Coast areas of California). We have reviewed the Transportation and Circulation Section of the FOR and DEIR and the associated technical appendices for the subject project. Based on our review, the sections of the FOR and DEIR fallow and address the proper standards of care associated with the preparation of traffic studies. SUMMARY The FEIR that is being considered has some significant omissions. In the Transportation and Circulation Section, there are potential significant impacts that has not identified, discussed or mitigated. The back- up of southbound traffic on N. Main Street between Edgewood Road and Walkie Way has the potential to back-up traffic and block intersections. The project is proposing to reduce the distance between these intersections, while adding traffic to the back-up of traffic. In the technical studies for the project, information is calculated that shows this back-up increasing into the future but was not evaluated or mitigated in the report text. This is important especially considering the overly wide intersection being created with the project at Walkie Way. TECHNICAL EVALUATION The vehicle queuing analysis summarized in the FEIR Tables T-4, T-8 and T-11 omit a key piece of data. The southbound through traffic movement for the Main Street/Edgewood Road/1-5 ramps do not have any queuing information. This is an important movement since the project is proposing to reduce the distance between the Main Street intersections at Edgewood Road and at Walkie Way/Project Site Entrance by 90 feet. This is an omission in the FEIR. The existing spacing between these two intersections in the southbound direction is approximately 390 feet. With the project, this distance is proposed to be reduced by 90 feet, resulting in about 300 feet of available queue (backup of traffic) before the queue would impact the operation of the intersection. Below is a summary of the applicant calculated queues for the southbound through movement from the technical appendices. The bold numbers indicate that the expected back-up of traffic or queue would impact the Walkie Way/Project Site Entry intersection. PO Box 2934. Prescott. AZ. 86302 . 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com Magnolia at the Park —The Addington November 18, 2019 Page 2 Existing Conditions Project Queuing Available Queue W thout Project Available I Queue With Project Existing AM PM Proposed AM PM SBT 39W 423' 75' 1 300' 1 391Y 302' Ooenina Year Conditions Proiecr Queuing Available Queue Without Project Available V Queue With Project Existing AM PM Proposed AM PM SBT 390' 456' 287' 300' 469' 1 296' 2040 Conditions Project queuing Available Queue Without Project Available Queue With Project ExistingAM PM Proposed AM PM SBT 390' 472' 331' 300' 499' 345' SBT— Southbound Through Lanes Bold indicates the queue is expected to extend into or past the Walkie Way/Project Site Entry As shown in the Existing Conditions table, the addition of the project traffic and reduction of queuing distance between the Edgewood Road and Walkie Way/Project Site Entry intersections would result in a project specific impact that has not been addressed or identified in the DEIR nor FEIR. The project could reduce the overall queue by 33 feet, however with the 90 foot reduction in overall queuing distance, the queue would extend past the project site access; blocking any traffic from exiting the proposed project and limiting the exiting traffic from the Discovery Cube Orange County. In the Opening Year table above, the "with project" queue is 13 feet and 9 feet longer than the base opening year AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way intersection, both Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. Finally, in the 2040 Conditions table, the southbound through movement queue is increased by 27 feet and 14 feet for the AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way intersection, both Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak hour and the Project Access will he blocked during the PM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. We would recommend that the FOR not be accepted by the City Council, until these significant project specific impacts are discussed, addressed and mitigated. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us, 'ff; r." v,A„ Sincerely, Stephen A. Oros , P.E., T.E., PTOE Traffic Engineer Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. PO Box 2934. Prescott. AZ , 86302. 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com Salas, Diana From: David Buster <bustausd@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:11 PM To: eComment Subject: "Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. I live in Floral Park and I am asking you to please vote no to rezone 2525 N. Main Street. David Buster Meridian Property Management 611 W. 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 92706 office 714-8361968 cell 714-235-7929 W ww.propertymanamementmeridian. com *E-mails sent or received shall neither constitute acceptance of conducting transactions via electronic means nor create a binding contract until and unless a written contract is signed by the parties Saias, Diana From: Masa Fujitani <mkfujita@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 4:54 PM To: eComment Subject: NO "Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street." Masa K. Fujitani CRIME SURVIVORS 0* 0 PCUUhce CeAfe , AWARENESS I PREVENTION I ADVf �_ I-IFAUIVG November 11, 2019 Santa Ana City Council 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988, M31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Mayor and Council Members, My name is Patricia Wenskunas, I am the Founder/CEO of Crime Survivors Inc. My group has gained national renown for our advocacy on behalf of the victims of violent crime and we are dedicated to the idea that with community support, respectful advocacy and hopeful healing, one can survive a violent crime, and thrive in their personal lives. The mission of Crime Survivors is to provide hope and healing to victims and survivors of crime through advocacy and the support of resources, information, and empowerment from the critical time after a crime occurs through the challenges and successes of surviving and thriving. My civic involvement extends well beyond Crime Survivors. I was one of the early proponents of California's Victim's Bill of Rights known as "Marsy's Law," a state constitutional amendment that was passed into law by California's voters in 2008. I am the Founder and former CEO of Orange County Crime Stoppers, an Advisory Board member at CalVCP, an Advisory Board member at Crime Victims United, a Board Member for The Children's Advocacy Center, and a Past Board Member of California Crime Stoppers. As an engaged, informed and active member of this community, I believe that progress is the key to creating safe communities. The under-utilized building located at 2525 N. Main Street is serving no one in this community and I believe a rezone should be approved. This type of vacant building, attracting nothing but crime and decay, becomes a core for criminal behavior and creates a strain on ever -important city services. Conversely, the benefits to the community of redevelopment at this site are vast: • The development will pay into affordable housing fund (HOO) approximatley $3mm. • The development will bring more than $500k annually to the City's general fund. • This particular area has a very high concentration of homeless and vagrants at the adjacent park and this area of Santa Ana has seen a significant increase in crime. Having a new beautiful community at the park with a full time presence, will serve to mitigate many of the current issues that plaque the park and this community. • We are deep in the midst of a housing crisis, and Santa Ana in need of 25k more housing units, of all types. ©(844) 853-HOPE O Santa Ana, CA 92705 info@crimesurvivors.org Twitter.com/crimesurvivors (949) 872-7895 PO BOX 54552, Irvine, CA 92619 O www.crimesurvivors.org Facebook.com/crimesurvivors I n stag ra m.com/crimesurvivors CRIME SURVIVORS 1 o"OuJl t, Ceh&h AWARENESS I PREVENTION I AI)J:_1, I HEALING c� � It is my understanding that the development team has revised the development numerous times in an effort to work with the community and additionally has now will provide permanent parking for The Discovery Science Center. The Discovery Science Center and the education it provides is an important educational tool in OC. The development team will renovate portions Santiago Park at a cost of over $lmm. All of the above give rise to better living conditions, safer communities and more revenue to help those in need. It is critical that Santa Ana protects the edges of communities to allow sites to go into disrepair will erode these important areas. To this end, I would like to submit this letter of support for the development at 2525 N. Main Street, Santa Ana. Respectfully, Patricia Wenskunas Founder/CEO Crime Survivors Resource Center (844) 853-HOPE Santa Ana, CA 92705 info@crimesurvivors.org 7Witter.com/crimesurvivors (949) 872-7895 '� PO BOX 54552, Irvine, CA 92619 O www.crimesurvivors.org O Facebook.com/crimesurvivors Instagram.com/crimesurvivors su b mi- tl-ed Q Dale November 18, 2019 toec, oroszengineeringgroup Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council Members Santa Ana City Council 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: Magnolia at the Park — The Addington —2525 N. Main Street, FEIR Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and Members of the City Council: t by OEG Ref 19-702 Grosz Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG) has prepared the following comment letter for the subject project. We have reviewed the Traffic and Circulation analysis prepared for this project at the request of the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA). We have prepared and reviewed over 200 Traffic Impact Analysis and Environmental Impact Report sections on Transportation and Circulation over the past 38 years (32+years in the Southern and Central Coast areas of California). We have reviewed the Transportation and Circulation Section of the FEIR and DEIR and the associated technical appendices for the subject project. Based on our review, the sections of the FEIR and DEIR follow and address the proper standards of care associated with the preparation of traffic studies. SUMMARY The FEIR that is being considered has some significant omissions. In the Transportation and Circulation Section, there are potential significant impacts that has not identified, discussed or mitigated. The back- up of southbound traffic on N. Main Street between Edgewood Road and Walkie Way has the potential to back-up traffic and block intersections. The project is proposing to reduce the distance between these intersections, while adding traffic to the back-up of traffic. In the technical studies for the project, information is calculated that shows this back-up increasing into the future but was not evaluated or mitigated in the report text. This is important especially considering the overly wide intersection being created with the project at Walkie Way. TECHNICAL EVALUATION The vehicle queuing analysis summarized in the FEIR Tables T-4, T-8 and T-11 omit a key piece of data. The southbound through traffic movement for the Main Street/Edgewood Road/I-S ramps do not have any queuing information. This is an important movement since the project is proposing to reduce the distance between the Main Street intersections at Edgewood Road and at Walkie Way/project Site Entrance by 90 feet. This is an omission in the FEIR. The existing spacing between these two intersections in the southbound direction is approximately 390 feet. With the project, this distance is proposed to be reduced by 90 feet, resulting in about 300 feet of available queue (backup of traffic) before the queue would impact the operation of the intersection. Below is a summary of the applicant calculated queues for the southbound through movement from the technical appendices. The bold numbers indicate that the expected back-up of traffic or queue would impact the Walkie Way/Project Site Entry intersection. PO Box 2934 . Prescott. AZ . 86302 . 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com Magnolia at the Park — The Addington November 18, 2019 Page 2 Available I Without Project txisting AM I PM SBT 1 390' 1 423' F 75' Available I Without Project Available With Project Queue Proposed AM PM 300' 390' 1 302' ject Queuing Available With Project SBT 390' 456' 28T 300'-- 469' 2040 Conditions Project Queuing Without Project Available With Projec[ txistin AM PM Proposed AM pM SBT 390' 472' 331' 300' 499' 1 345' SBT — Southbound Through Lanes Bold indicates the queue is expected to extend into or past the Walkie Way/Project Site Entry As shown in the Existing Conditions table, the addition of the project traffic and reduction of queuing distance between the Edgewood Road and Walkie Way/Project Site Entry intersections would result In a project specific impact that has not been addressed or identified in the DEIR nor FEIR. The project could reduce the overall queue by 33 feet, however with the 90 foot reduction in overall queuing distance, the queue would extend past the project site access; blocking any traffic from exiting the proposed project and limiting the exiting traffic from the Discovery Cube Orange County. In the Opening Year table above, the "with project" queue is 13 feet and 9 feet longer than the base opening year AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way intersection, both Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. Finally, in the 2040 Conditions table, the southbound through movement queue is increased by 27 feet and 14 feet for the AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way intersection, both Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak hour and the Project Access will be blocked during the PM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. We would recommend that the FEIR not be accepted by the City Council, until these significant project specific impacts are discussed, addressed and mitigated. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us Sincerely, s a - a Stephen A. Oros , P.E., T.E., PTOF t %, Traffic Engineer yd Ffv" tph_ wee Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. PO Box 2934. Prescott . AZ. 86302. 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com 9 S�Abm4eel Iti1gItn I Santa Ana City Council, R Elected officials should represent our great city and be the O voice of their constituents. R Y I have three simple points. K (1) I'm puzzled as to why any council member would be in favor of apartments at 2525 Main Street. Over 99% of the Park Santiago Neighborhood, including Floral Park, West R Floral Park, French Park, Washington Square, Fisher Park, K Morrison Park, Santa Ana Historical committee and countless I others, that are overwhelmingly opposed to this project. (2) Many residents have made these nostalgic neighborhoods gems by making their homes here, some over 40 or more years. We are committed and rooted in Santa Ana for a very long time if not a life time and support responsible development. Santa Ana is not home to this developer, and the only reason for him being here is financial gain. (3) Denying the developer a zoning change and this ill conceived project that has had countless changes, could benefit the city and other developers for future acquisitions. This has put City Council the Planning Commission and the neighborhood in the crossfire and a very awkward position. Rory Kirk rorykirk@ymaii.com 714-925-4555 2429 North French Street Santa Ana, CA 92706 _ RI .. :A PWA r y. F W ` arw W CL A +r.. Q U:r,�p Ftib�AWuO :n M� fir, LL. N 0 _ x;. W .... LU Z �, Y illlgl N , w(,yer & n lhan [-I r 89Dave ect Ne•eipnr; Beat.... ,,,; 92GGG 949 854 7000 November 18, 2019 Charles S. Krolikowski Charies.Krolikowski@ndif.com VIA HAND DELIVERY AT MEETING VIA E-MAIL CITYCOUNCIL@SANTA-ANA.ORG Santa Ana City Council 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988, M31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Re: Magnolia at the Park Multi -Family Residential Project (the "Addington") Located at 2525 N. Main Street Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031) Honorable Mayor Pulido and Members of the City Council: This office represents the Park Santiago Neighborhood Association ("PSNA"), a coalition of interested property owners located in the City of Santa Ana ("City"), within the zone of impacts of the proposed residential development project commonly referred to as Magnolia at the Park Multi -Family Residential Project or the Addington, located at 2525 N. Main Street ("Project"). This letter addresses AC 2525 Main LLC's ("Applicant") appeal of the City of Santa Ana Planning Commission's ("Planning Commission") recent denial of the Proposed Project at its meeting on October 28, 2019. PSNA is concerned regarding the Applicant's continued pursuit of approvals that do not conform to the policies and objectives of the City's General Plan and its efforts to do so by way of bribing adjacent property owners. In addition, the City's continued willingness to consider a high density multi -family residential development in an area where it would not mesh raises concerns as to why the City has not asked the Applicant to consider other viable development options for the site that would not have a detrimental effect on the community and that would conform with the policies and objectives of the General Plan. PSNA respectfully requests that the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ("City Council") affirm the Planning Commission's denial, in accordance with recommendation one in the Staff Report. PSNA submits that the Planning Commission correctly rejected the modified Project. Indeed, despite multiple revisions, the Project remains grossly inconsistent with the City of Santa Ana's General Plan and the character of the surrounding community. At the same time, the Project documents 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Lai Mayas Ne wpe-i Beach l" a'ei Creet; newmeyerdillion com Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 2 reveal that its impacts, environmental or otherwise, still have not been properly considered by the elected body or its constituents. For these reasons, among others detailed more fully below, the Planning Commission's denial must be upheld. In addition to its written objection to any Project approval, this written comment also serves as PSNA's formal request for written notice in advance of any future meetings regarding the City's consideration of the Project, including, without limitation, the filing of any notice of determination related to the purportedly Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031) ("FEIR"). 1. THE PROJECT'S HISTORY, MULTIPLE MODIFICATIONS, AND THREE DENIALS. Jeremy Ogulnick, representing AC 2525 Main, LLC, is proposing to construct a 256-unit multi —family residential development (58 dwelling units per acre) on a 4-4-acre parcel land at 2525 North Main Street. Additionally, the Applicant is proposing to create a of second parcel to accommodate a 180-space surface level parking lot that is proposed to be used by the Discovery Cube on an adjacent 1.4-acre parcel. Actions required to approve the Project include the certification and adoption of the FOR for the development, which includes a Clarifications to the FEIR document, a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, and a statement of overriding considerations. Entitlements needed for the development include the approval of a development agreement between the City and applicantlowner, a general plan amendment to redesignate the land use designation of the property from Professional and Administrative Office ( PAO) to District Center ( DC), and an amendment application to rezone the property from Professional (P) to Specific Development No. 93 (SD- 93). The Project's history, compared to its most current iteration, is quite different from when the Planning Commission first held a public hearing to consider the Applicant's then - proposed 496-unit (84 per acre) development project on January 14, 2019. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3 [discussing Project background and various modifications].) City staff recommended and presented a reduction in development from 496 units (84 Dwelling units per acre [DUA]) to 476 units, 81 DUA. The Project was denied by the Planning Commission. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2- 3.) The City Council directed the Applicant go back to the Planning Department and Planning Commission after consultation with the community. (City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-2) This cycle continued until the Applicant again informed City staff that it would make further modifications before again seeking to proceed before City Council. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1 thru 2-3.) The July 22, 2019, Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at the last minute due to no quorum. On August 12, 2019 the 4398.101 18504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 3 Applicant's Project of 347 units resulted in an impasse by the Planning Commission. The Applicant chose to appeal the Project to the City Council. Following this meeting and due to extensive modifications to the Project, the City required that a modified project be presented to the Planning Commission once again. The latest modifications have culminated in the present, unrecognizable, and rashly considered Project —a far cry from the initial Project as considered and evaluated in the FEIR. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-3 thru 2-4 [modified Project in its current iteration].) The staff report identifies the modified Project will have a lot line adjustment and be built on 4.4 acres, with the remaining 1.4 acres to be used by a third party for surface parking. There is no mention of selling this 1.4 acres to a third party in the staff report. The 4.4 acre property would still require the complete demolition of an existing two-story, 81,172 square foot office building. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1 [project location information]; see also, id. at 2-5 [discussing demolition of existing office building].) The intensity of the proposed use and requisite Project construction (demolition of an existing building) stands in harsh contrast to the surrounding, far less intensive land uses, including the designated open space "Santiago Park" to the north and the single family residential homes — R1 to the east and south. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1 [Project location information and adjacent uses].) On or about October 28, 2019, the modified Project came before the Planning Commission for the third time. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1 [listing date of hearing].) The Planning Commission denied, again for a third time, approval of the Project. (See Official Video of Planning Commission Regular Meeting.)' In its present iteration before the City Council, the Project purports to construct a 256- unit multifamily housing project at 58 dwelling units per acre, with 511 parking spaces proposed, and an additional 180 surface parking spaces on the second adjacent lot. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1, 2-4, Tbl. 1, 2-5, passim.) However, the conditions of approval acknowledge that no joint parking agreement is in place and that there would not be one until the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-603.) Even upon issuance, it appears that any joint parking agreement would be revocable at any time and by either party. (Ibid.) Again, entitlements requested include the following: • Adoption of an ordinance approving a development agreement between the Applicant and the City, identified as Development Agreement No. 2018-01; The meeting minutes are not yet available, accordingly, the video is available at h¢ps://santaana aranicus com/N/lediaPlaver.Phn?view id=2&clip id 2527 (last accessed Nov. 13, 2019. on tile). 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 4 • Adoption of a resolution approving a general plan amendment to re -designate the property from Professional & Administrative Office ("PAO") to District Center ("DC"), identified as General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; • Adoption of an ordinance approving an amendment application to rezone the property from Professional ("P") to Specific Development No. 93 ("SD-93"), despite language in Division 26 that requires any specific development to maintain the values of the surrounding properties; and, • Adoption of a resolution certifying the FEIR, including adoption of environmental findings of fact under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), adoption of a purported "Clarification to the Final EIR" (City Staff Rept. at p. 2-2), a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Project will cause a substantial and significant deprivation of the property rights of adjacent residents. For example, in public comment provided to the City Council on or about September 3, 2019, a report detailed the potential home price devaluation in the Park Santiago neighborhood that would result from the development of the proposed Project. (See City Council, Sept. 3, 2019, [public comment re Park Santiago price devaluation resulting from Project].) The Project Applicant took a unique approach in response to this apparent situation. Specifically, it appears that the Applicant solicited adjacent property owners' support by offering a substantial monetary sum (of at least $35,000) in exchange for an agreement not to object to the Project. 2. ANY CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE MODIFIED PROJECT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. As the City Council is aware, a city's general plan provides the constitution for all future development in the City. As a practical matter no city can function without it." (See Nelson v. Carlson (1993) 17 Cal.AppAth 732, 740, as modified on denial of reh'g (Aug. 27, 1993).) Indeed, the Legislature has developed a comprehensive scheme covering a general plan's development, adoption, and amendment. (See Gov. Code, § 65100 et seq.) Every city is required to prepare and adopt one. (Gov. Code, §§ 65300, 65350.) A general plan must include a detailed discussion covering a city's land use, circulation, housing, conservation, noise and safety, along with "a statement of development policies and shall include a diagram or diagrams and text setting forth objectives, principles, standards, and plan proposals." (Gov. Code, § 65302.) Once adopted, a city's zoning ordinances must be consistent with the general plan's objectives, policies, land uses and programs. (Gov. Code, § 65860, subd. (a)(ii); see also Lesher Comms., Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 535-536.) As such, the alteration or amendment of a general plan should not be taken lightly. The impact on the City's residents is significant and a perceived benefit such as revenue is 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 5 insufficient to justify the negative impacts of increased traffic, increased density, incompatibility with neighboring communities, and environmental factors that would be caused by allowing the Applicant's proposed amendment to the City's General Plan. Moreover, the Applicant's efforts to purchase the silence of those opposed to its application should mandate denial as a matter of principal and equity. As noted above, the Planning Commission denied approval of the Project three times, the latest on October 28, 2019. (See Official Video of Planning Comm'n Regular Meeting.)2 In its present iteration before the City Council, the Project purports to construct a 256-unit multifamily housing project at 58 dwelling units per acre, with 511 parking spaces proposed and an additional 180 surface parking spaces on the second adjacent lot. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1, 2-4, Tbl. 1, 2-5, passim.) Also discussed above, the Project site is approximately 4.51 acres and construction thereon will require the complete demolition of an existing two-story, 81,172 square foot office building. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1.) Again, the intensity of the proposed use stands in stark contrast to its surrounding surrounded uses, including an open space park to the north and single family residential homes to the east and south. (See ibid.) The Project site has a current land use designation of Professional and Administrative Office, with a zoning of Professional. The allowable uses of the property are limited to professional and administrative offices, banking or finance, travel agencies, medical and dental offices, museums or science centers, pharmacies, child care facilities, and freestanding regular -hours eateries. (See SAMC, §41-313.) Other allowable uses of the property, subject to a conditional use permit, include hospitals, convalescent facilities, health clubs, trade schools, ambulance response services, late -night eateries, adult day care facilities, banquet halls, clubs or lodges, and bail bonds. (SAMC, §41- 313.5.) The maximum allowable density for the adjacent R-1 district wherein the Park Santiago neighborhood is located is low density residential (LR-7) or seven (7) dwelling units per acre, with an actual density of 4.4 dwelling units per acre. (Ibid.) The City's current General Plan does not support the approval of the Project, even in its current form. Excerpts of the relevant land use and housing elements that remain inconsistent with the proposed Project approvals are referenced below: The meeting minutes are not yet available. accordingly. the video is available at htips:Hsantaaiia.Qranicus.com/Mecliilllaver.12hp'?vieNv id=2&clip id-7527 (last accessed Nov. 13, 2019: on file). 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 6 INCONSISTENCIES WITH LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element is divided into five sections: Purpose & Scope, Community Factors, Policy Plan, Implementation Plan, and Appendix. Excerpts of the Land Use Element relevant to this objection are cited below: Community Factors • "A key role in shaping [the] future growth and redevelopment, the Land Use Element perpetuates positive land uses and promotes development which supports a high quality of life throughout the community." (Land Use Element, at p. 5, emphasis added.) • "Many of the City's land use characteristics are directly related to its historic position as one of Orange County's earliest pioneer settlements." (Ibid, emphasis added.) The City is the fifth largest city in Orange County, of which 58% of its 27.3 square miles is devoted to residential development. (Id., at p. 6.) Policy Plan • Land Use Goal 3: "Preserve and improve the character and integrity of neighborhoods." (Land Use Element, at p. 9.) Land Use Goal 6: "Reduce residential overcrowding to promote public health and safety." (Ibid.) Land Use Policies • Policy 1.2: "Support high density residential development within the City's District Centers as a part of mixed use development." (Id., at p. 10.) • Policy 2.2: "Support new development which is harmonious in scale and character with existing development in the area." (ld., at p. 11.) • Policy 3.1: "Support development which provides a positive contribution to neighborhood character and identity." (Id., at p. 12.) • Policy 3.5: "Encourage new development and/or additions to existing development that are compatible in scale, and consistent with the architectural style and character of the neighborhood." (Ibid, emphasis added.) 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 7 • Policy 5.2: "Protect the community from incompatible land uses." (Id., at p. 13.) • Policy 5.4: "Support land uses which are consistent with the Land Use Plan of the Land Use Element." (Ibid.) • Policy 5.5: "Encourage development which is compatible with, and supportive of surrounding land uses." (Ibid.) INCONSISTENCIES WITH HOUSING ELEMENT The Housing Element introduces the City's housing needs and contains an analysis of resources to address those needs. (Housing Element, at p. 2.) Excerpts of the Housing Element relevant to this objection are cited below: COMMUTE PATTERNS • "[T]he majority of employed Santa Ana residents work outside of the City, approximately 20 percent work within the City." (Housing Element, at p. 13.) NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS • "Approximately 70 percent of all residential areas within the City are single-family residential neighborhoods. Many of these neighborhoods are established and well maintained, and several neighborhoods contain state and local historic resources." (Id., at p. 15.) "To protect and stabilize residential neighborhoods, support the City's economic base, and provide housing for the local workforce, Santa Ana is developing new residential neighborhoods in District Centers close to employment centers. These District Centers include the Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone, MacArthur Place, Downtown Santa Ana, City Place, and similar locations. [... ] These residential neighborhoods are intensely urbanized, transit oriented, and explicitly designed to support a full array of housing needs in Santa Ana." (Ibid., emphasis added.) AVAILABLE LAND FOR HOUSING • "The City has identified areas for future development and mixed uses within its District Centers and transit corridors. [... ] The sites are specifically chosen to create distinct and vibrant activity centers linked together with a variety of transportation options." (Id., at p. 30.) 4398.101 / 85045012 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 8 POLICY FRAMEWORK Policy HE-1.7: "Historic Preservation. Support preservation and enhancement of residential structures, properties, street designs, lot patterns, and other visible reminders of neighborhoods that are considered local historical or cultural resources." (Housing Element, at p. 43.) Similar inconsistencies should also cause the City concern. For example, the Project contemplates public access to the City's Santiago Park via the proposed development. This private -to -public access creates obvious problems with respect to maintenance costs and liability, but the Project as contemplated does not appear to address those issues. Moreover, the Project documents frequently reference the Project as a District Center, although its current iteration does not contemplate a mixed -use component, a requirement of any District Center development. For the foregoing reasons, among others, any approval of the Project would be inconsistent with and continue to violate the City's General Plan. 3. THE PROJECT APPROVAL MAY SUBJECT THE CITY TO SUBSTANTIAL LITIGATION. In addition to the problems with respect inconsistency with the General Plan as identified above, the City's actions described herein may give rise to a compensable regulatory taking. Specifically, the City's approval of the Project will intentionally interfere with the property rights of the surrounding property owners, depressing the value of the properties wherein some or all economic uses of the will be impacted under the Penn Central and/or Kavanau tests. (See, e.g., Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City (1978) 438 U.S. 104, 123; Kavanau v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (1997) 16 CalAth 761, 771-777; see also Jefferson Street Ventures, LLC v. City of Indio (2015) 236 Cal.AppAth 1175.) Evidence of this depression in value has already been provided to the City Council. (See City Council, Sept. 3, 2019, [public comment re Park Santiago price devaluation resulting from Project].) In fact, on September 3, 2019, public comment provided in the formal record for the Project detailed the potential home price devaluation that would result. (Ibid.) Here, the Park Santiago neighborhood consists of approximately 1100 homes at an average value of $700,000 each. If the value of these homes is depressed by even as little as 5%, or approximately $35,000, that would result in potential losses of up to $38.5 million. (See ibid.) As such, the City may have significant exposure for inverse condemnation for injury to property interests caused by the City's failure to properly and thoroughly consider the impacts of this Project on surrounding properties, although such impacts are required to be considered under Division 26 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code ("SAMC"). (See Knick v. Township of 4398.101 18504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 9 Scott, Pennsylvania (2019) 139 S.Ct. 2162; Landgate, Inc. v. California Coastal Comm'n (1998) 17 CalAth 1006, 1029.) Further, it appears that the Applicant acknowledged these potential losses and has solicited surrounding property owners' support by offering at least $35,000 to certain homeowners in exchange for their support of the Project. The City Council cannot and should not condone this conduct, as it results in a further violation of Chapter 41, which requires that the value of surrounding properties be maintained prior to the approval of any specific development. (SAMC, § 41-593.1.) Failure to properly consider the impacts outlined above, among others, may subject the City to inverse condemnation liability as a result. 4. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONTAINS PROVISIONS THAT MAY IMPERMISSIBLY CONTRACT AWAY THE CITY'S DISCRETION. Land use regulations involve the exercise of the police power and the right to exercise the police power cannot be contracted away. (See Richeson v. Helal (2007) 158 Cal.AppAth 268, 280-281, as modified (Dec. 21, 2007); Avco Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Com. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 785, 800; City of Glendale v. Superior Court (1993) 18 Cal.AppAth 1768, 1778-1779; Delucchi v. County of Santa Cruz (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 814, 823; Carty v. City of Ojai (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 329, 342-343.) If a contract cannot be read harmoniously with the police power, the contract would be unconstitutional as "contracting away' the City's sovereign police power. (Delucchi v. County of Santa Cruz, supra, at pp. 823-824.) Although a development agreement itself operates as a legislative act and not necessarily a contract, it is subject to the principles expressed above. In Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 CalAth 116, 130-132, the Court struck down a similar project by finding that the city violated CEQA because it had impermissibly committed itself to the project before completing an adequate CEQA review. When a public agency gives a project "approval" it "commits to a definite course of action in regard to a project." (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs., § 1532, subd. (a).) Because the proposed development agreement can be read to unconditionally commit to an approval without first attaining CEQA compliance and without proper preservation of the City's police powers, any related Project approval may be held invalid. 5. IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE PROJECT AS IS, IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY REFERENDUM. If the City Council approves the Project in its current state, the support of ten percent or more of the registered voters will be easily attainable for a referendum of the legislative entitlements. The City's own staff report supports this, as it repeatedly references the 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 10 number of opponents as early as the initial notice of proceeding, which received 163 comment letters. For example, on August 27, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a work-study session to overview the Project. As part of this session, the Planning Commission received numerous comments, largely opposed, including thirty- two (32) verbal comments, with three (3) in support and twenty-nine (29) in opposition; and nine (9) written comments, with one (1) in support and eight (8) in opposition. The opponents to the Project have only increased over time. At the latest Planning Commission meeting on October 28, 2019, sixty-two (62) speakers expressed opposition and only two (2) expressed support of the project. In addition, ninety-eight (98) individuals submitted written comments, with ninety-four (94) in opposition and only four (4) in support. Upon submittal of any such referendum, the City will have a mandatory duty to process and submit any such initiative and referendum measures. (Duran v. Cassidy (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 574 [city clerk]; Elec. Code, § 4008; Farley v. Healey (1967) 67 Cal.2d 325 [charter of the City and County of San Francisco]; Elec. Code, § 180; see also Yost v. Thomas (1984) 36 Cal.3d 561, 564, fn. 2.). The cost to the City and its taxpayers to process such a referendum could be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. 6. THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT APPROVE THE PROJECT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE NOTICE. The requirement for meaningful notice and an opportunity to be heard extend to rezonings and other legislative acts. This is particularly true where property rights are affected. As noted above, the value of the impact to the neighboring homes may be substantial. Thus, adjacent properties are entitled to due process notice. The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires "at a minimum ... that deprivation of life, liberty or property by adjudication be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing..." (Mullane v. Central Hanover Co. (1950) 339 U.S. 306, 313.) The "root requirement' of due process is "that an individual be given an opportunity for a hearing before he is deprived of any significant property interest." (Scott v. City of Indian Wells (1972) 6 Cal.3d 541, 548-549; Boddie v. Connecticut (1971) 401 U.S. 371, 379.) Notice and an opportunity to be heard are prerequisites. (Anderson Nat. Bank v. Luckett (1944) 321 U.S. 233, 240-247; Horn v. County of Ventura (1979) 24 Cal.3d 605, 612-615; Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 517; Kennedy v. City of Hayward (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 953.) State and local law therefore require valid notice of the hearing be given to nearby property owners. (Gov. Code, §§ 65901, 65905; FCZO, § 877(13)(5)(c).) For notice to be valid, "notice must, at a minimum, be reasonably calculated to afford affected persons the realistic opportunity to protect their interests. [Citations.]" (Horn v. County of 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 11 Ventura, supra., 24 Cal.3d at p. 617.) Several cases have held that to be adequate "the notice must be such as would according to common experience be reasonably adequate to the purpose." (See, e.g., Kennedy v. South Coast Regional Com., supra, 68 Cal.App.3d at pp. 670-672; Litchfield v. County of Marin (1955) 130 Cal.App.2d 806, 813; Scott v. City of Indian Wells (1972) 6 Cal.3d 541, 548-549; Drum v. Fresno County Dept. of Public Works (1983) 144 Cal.App.3d 777, 782-783.) Consistently, the SAMC likewise acknowledges the requirement for valid notice to adjacent property owners. Section 41-645 governs the City Council's review of the Planning Commission's denial of the proposed Project. (See Code 1952, § 9250.14; Ord. No. NS-455, § 1, 6-20-60; Ord. No. NS-521, § 18, 6-19-61; Ord. No. NS-989, § 1, 11-17-69; Ord. No. NS-2847, § 43, 8-5-13; Ord. No. NS-2923, § 9, 9-16-17 adding § 41- 645 to SAMC).) Section 41-465, subdivision (g) limits the scope of the City Council's determinations on appeal as "within the limitations imposed by this chapter" with specific reference to Chapter 41, Zoning: The council, or in the case of a zoning administrator appeal, the planning commission, may, after public hearing, affirm, reverse, change, modify the original decision and may make any additional determination it shall consider appropriate within the limitations imposed by this chapter. Such decision shall be filed with the clerk of the council, and the city planning department; one (1) copy thereof shall be sent to the applicant. (SAMC, § 41-645, subd. (g).) Along those lines, all provisions of Chapter 41 must be interpreted and applied as, not the ceiling, but the basic "minimum requirements for the promotion of the public safety, health, convenience, comfort, and general welfare." (Code 1952, § 9281; Ord. No. NS-455, § 1, 6-20-60 adding § 41-766 to SAMC.) As part of those express "limitations imposed by" Chapter 41, the City Council's ability to approve plans for a development project like the Project here are contingent on its providing of adequate notice. (See SAMC, § 41-672, subd. (a).) Specifically, "whenever approval of plans for a development project will constitute a substantial or significant deprivation of property rights of other landowners[,]" as it will here. (See ibid.) Such an approval is invalid unless the director of planning and development services has set the matter for public hearing and provided valid notice at least five (5) days prior to the date of the hearing. (See ibid.) Valid notice must include "notice of the time and place of the hearing to all persons, including businesses, corporations, or other public or private entities, shown on the last equalized assessment roll, as owning real property within three hundred (300) feet of the property which is the subject of the application." (See ibid.) Moreover, the notice "shall be given by direct mailing to the owners at least five (5) days prior to the date of the hearing." (See ibid.) 4398.101 / 85045011 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 12 Finally, notice regarding the City Council's potential action on a matter that required the recommendation from the Planning Commission cannot be given until after the Planning Commission has issued its recommendation. Failure to do so results in inadequate notice under established law. Here, only the staff report contained the recommendation from the Planning Commission —not the earlier, defective notice. As the courts have explained, notice without those recommendations is patently insufficient: As we will explain, section 65856 is silent on the timing of the notice and therefore creates an ambiguity as to when, in relation the planning commission's recommendation, the notice may be given. As we will further explain, a construction of section 65856's notice provision is inextricably bound with what must be included in that notice, a question that must be answered by looking to section 65094, which states that the contents of that notice must include a "general explanation of the matter to be considered." Consistent with the purpose behind the Planning and Zoning Law, we will interpret the phrase "general explanation of the matter to be considered" to include the planning commission's recommendation. Therefore, notice of a legislative body's hearing cannot be given until the planning commission has made a recommendation on the matter under consideration. (Environmental Defense Project of Sierra County v. County of Sierra (2008) 158 Cal.AppAth 877, 888, as modified (Jan. 9, 2008).) Because inaccurate notice is akin to no notice at all, the Project cannot go forward on the defective notice issued without the requisite recommendations from the Planning Commission. (Drum v. Fresno County Dept. of Public Works, supra, 144 Cal.App.3d at p. 783.) 7. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND REQUEST FOR WRITTEN NOTICE. For the foregoing reasons, among others, PSNA respectfully requests that the City Council deny the proposed Project, consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Additionally, PSNA reserves its rights to submit further public comment at and up to the close of the record on the Project and requests formal, written notice in advance of any future meetings or notices of determination related to the Project. 4398.101 / 8504501.2 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 13 Based on the foregoing, PNSA respectfully requests that the City act in accordance with the Planning Commission's recommendation and, for the third time, reject this faulty, rushed Project. Very truly yours, I Charles S. Krolikowski Cc: Mayor Miguel Pulido, M2ulido(a)santa-ana orq Mayor Pro Tern Juan Villegas, jvillegasAsanta-ana orq Councilmember David Penaloza, c1penaloza(Usanta-ana ora Councilmember Jose Solorio, JSolorio(cDsanta-ana orq Councilmember Vicente Sarmiento, vsarmientoAsanta-ana orq Councilmember Cecilia Iglesias, c Iesias(@santa-ana orq City Public Comments, eComment(c)santa-ana orq Park Santiago Neighborhood Association CSK:sIt 4398.101 / 8504501.2 SJ�b v✓1 r �� C1 C �%I-�-CX 1 I I 1 � � 17 U November 19, 2019 VIA HAND DELIVERY VIA E-MAIL CITYCOUNCIL@SANTA-ANA.ORG Santa Ana City Council 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988, M31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Ne;:meyer & D_3ien LLF 895 Dove Stied Fifth Floor Nevvport Beach: C.4 92660 949 H4 7000 Charles S. Krolikowski Charles.Krolikowski@ndlf.com Re: Magnolia at the Park Multi -Family Residential Project (the "Addington") Located at 2525 N. Main Street Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031) Honorable Mayor Pulido and Members of the City Council: On behalf of the Park Santiago Neighborhood Association ("PSNA"), a coalition of interested property located in the City of Santa Ana ("City'), and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), we submit this written comment for consideration and inclusion in the administrative record in advance of tonight's hearing on the proposed residential development project commonly referred to as Magnolia at the Park Multi -Family Residential Project or the Addington, located at 2525 N. Main Street ("Project"). This evening, the Santa Ana City Council ("City Council") must consider, after the Planning Commission's denial, the Project's proposed entitlements and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 2018-01 (SCH No. 2018021031) ("FEIR"). PSNA respectfully requests that the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council affirm the Planning Commission's denial in accordance with recommendation one, both on the grounds outlined in PSNA's November 18, 2019, letter and on the grounds detailed herein. PSNA submits that the Planning Commission correctly rejected the hastily modified Project, including its FEIR. Indeed, it is the City's responsibility to independently ensure that the FEIR meets CEQA's requirements. The City, as lead agency, must guarantee that the FEIR sufficiently identifies and mitigates for the Project's significant environmental impacts. There is no excuse for the City's failure to do so. As such, the City Council should reject the proposed entitlements and uphold the Planning Commission's decision, as they are inconsistent with the policies of the City's General Plan ("General Plan") and are not supported by a legally adequate FEIR. 3917.101 18509864.1 Las Vegas I Ne,4port Eeac;" `r%aini;!. Cae•ak newmeverdillion.com Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 2 The FEIR is insufficient in many ways. The FEIR is legally inadequate because the Project description incorporates significant new information without providing an opportunity for meaningful public review and comment. At the same time, the FEIR still fails to meaningfully address or respond to many of the 163 written comments. Thus, the City Council should take no action on the FEIR, prepare its own, independent EIR, and, at the very least, recirculate the FEIR to allow an opportunity for truly meaningful public comment. If the City certifies this FEIR as -is, it will remain subject to significant challenge. The City may base its decision not to certify the FEIR on its failure to comply with standards governing the legal adequacy of EIRs generally. It may also determine that the FEIR is inadequate because revisions to the FOR are required to respond to changes to the Project, changes in circumstances, or new information arising after the FEIR was completed. At the very least, the FEIR should be recirculated for proper public comment before it is certified. In addition to its written objection to any Project approval, this written comment also serves as PSNA's formal request for written notice in advance of any future meetings regarding the City's consideration of the Project, including, without limitation, the filing of any notice of determination related to the FEIR. 1. THE PROJECT'S HISTORY, MULTIPLE MODIFICATIONS, AND SOLICITATION OF SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT. The Project's history, compared to its most current iteration, is quite different from when the Planning Commission first held a public hearing to consider the Applicant's then - proposed 496-unit (84 per acre) development project. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3 [discussing Project background and various modifications].) City staff recommended a reduction in development density and denial of the Project as it was then proposed. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) The City Council agreed and the Applicant modified the Project. (City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) This cycle continued until the Applicant again informed City staff that it would make further modifications before again seeking to proceed before City Council. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) The latest modifications have culminated in the present, unrecognizable and rashly considered Project —a far cry from the initial Project as considered and evaluated in the FEIR. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-3-2-4 [modified Project in its current iteration].) The modified Project remains on approximately 5.93 acres of property and would still require the complete demolition of an existing two-story, 81,172 square foot office building. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1 [project location information]; see also, id. at p. 2-5 [discussing demolition of existing office building].) The intensity of the proposed use and requisite Project construction (demolition of an 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 3 existing building) stands in harsh contrast to the surrounding, far less intensive land uses, including the designated open space "Santiago Park" to the north and the single family residential homes — R1 to the east and south. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1 [Project location information and adjacent uses].) On or about October 28, 2019, the modified Project came before the Planning Commission for review. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1 [listing date of hearing].) The Planning Commission denied approval of the Project. (See Official Video of Planning Comm'n Regular Meeting.)' In its present iteration before the City Council, the Project purports to construct a 256- unit multifamily housing project at 58 dwelling units per acre, with 180 surface parking spaces proposed. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1, 2-4, Tbl. 1, 2-5, passim.) Entitlements requested include the following: • Adoption of an ordinance approving a development agreement between the Applicant and the City, identified as Development Agreement No. 2018-01; • Adoption of a resolution approving a general plan amendment to re -designate the property from Professional & Administrative Office ("PAO") to District Center ("DC"), identified as General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06; • Adoption of an ordinance approving an amendment application to rezone the property from Professional ("P") to Specific Development No. 93 ("SD-93"), despite language in Division 26 that requires any specific development to maintain the values of the surrounding properties; and, • Adoption of a resolution certifying the FEIR, including adoption of environmental findings of fact under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), adoption of a purported "Clarification to the Final EIR" (City Staff Rept. at p. 2-2), a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Project will cause a substantial and significant deprivation of the property rights of adjacent residents and businesses. For example, in public comment provided to the City Council on or about September 3, 2019, a report detailed the potential home price devaluation in the Park Santiago neighborhood that would result from the development of the proposed Project. (See City Council, Sept. 3, 2019, [public comment re Park Santiago price devaluation resulting from Project].) The Project Applicant took a unique approach in response to this apparent situation. Specifically, it appears that the Applicant solicited surrounding property owners' support by offering a substantial The meeting minutes are not yet available, accordingly, the video is available at https://santaaiia.gi-aiiicus.com/MediaP]avei-.plip?view id=2&clip id=25)7 (last accessed Nov. 13, 2019, on file). 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 4 monetary sum (up to $35,000) in exchange for an agreement not to object to the Project. 2. THE FEIR'S PROJECT DESCRIPTION MAY BE INADEQUATE, RESULTING IN SIMILARLY FLAWED ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES. An environmental impact report, commonly referred to as an "EIR," is at the heart of CEQA. (See 14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15124.) A proper EIR provides the public and governmental decision -makers with detailed information on a project's likely environmental effects, describes the ways of minimizing such effects, and considers potential alternatives to a project. (Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21002.1, 21061, 21100.) An accurate project description "is the sine qua non of an informative and legally sufficient EIR." (County of Inyo v. City of L.A. (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 185, 193, 199 (hereafter County of Inyo).) When a proposed project is accompanied by an inaccurate or incomplete description, it undermines CEQA by drawing "a red herring across the path of public input." (Id. at pp. 193, 199.) A court will reject an EIR with an incomplete or inaccurate project description because, as the court stated in County of Inyo v. City of L.A.: Only through an accurate view of the project may affected outsiders and public decision -makers balance the proposal's benefit against its environmental cost, consider mitigation measures, assess the advantage of terminating the proposal (i.e., the "no project alternative") and weigh other alternatives in the balance. (Id. at p. 198.) Because CEQA defines "project" as "the whole of an action," (14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15378; see Habitat & Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1297; Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1209, 1220 (hereafter Banning Ranch)), an EIR must also describe the entire proposed project —not a piecemeal version. (East Sacramento Partnership for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 281, 293; Banning Ranch, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1222; Communities for a Better Envt. v. City of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.AppAth 70, 98.) A project description must include future expansion or later phases of a project that will foreseeably result from project approval. (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376 (hereafter Laurel Heights); 14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15126 [EIR's impact analysis must consider all phases of project].) Additionally, an EIR's project description must be internally consistent. If not, it cannot provide a vehicle for informed public participation in the decision -making process. (County of Inyo, 71 Cal.App.3d at p. 197 [shifting EIR description from groundwater pumping to replacing the entire aqueduct system].) 3917.101 18509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 5 Here, the Project proposes a large-scale planned residential development that violates the General Plan as discussed in detail in our letter regarding the same, dated November 18, 2019. Moreover, under the terms of the existing entitlements and the existing Project description in the FEIR, the Project is capable of a much higher maximum density than that being considered in the environmental review. As such, the Project description may be inaccurate because it fails to identify, and thus properly consider, changes to the existing land use designations and the maximum allowable density based on the proposed entitlements to the same. 3. THE FEIR MAY IMPROPERLY ASSUME A POST -DEVELOPMENT BASELINE. The idea of a "baseline" in the context of the FEIR is fundamental to its legitimacy. As a general matter, a baseline is important in part because it operates as the starting point by which all future comparisons are made. It follows that an EIR, like the FEIR here, which purports to report the environmental impacts of a proposed project, must start at the beginning. In other words, the baseline used as the yardstick by which relative change is measured must, itself, be a sound source for comparison. Experts explain the concept of a false baseline as the shifting "waistline" problem. For many of the same reasons, it would be difficult to determine weight loss if the starting scale measured you 30 pounds underweight. An EIR is likewise of little value if potential impacts, alternatives, and mitigation measures are evaluated relative to a false or shifting starting point. CEQA acknowledges this by defining how a project must determine its baseline. According to Title 14 Section 15125(a), a baseline condition must reflect the existing conditions, applicable plan designations, and zoning for the Project area in effect. Yet, the FEIR's impact analyses and conclusions are often based on the assumed approval of the underlying entitlements it purports to evaluate. Similar issues exist throughout the FEIR, as well as just in the Project description. Separately, the Project fails to properly consider its impacts relative to the applicable general, regional, and specific plans. (14 Cal. Code Regs., §15125, subd. (d).) Ultimately, CEQA requires an evaluation of the Project in its existing environmental and regulatory setting —not in a vacuum. Accordingly, an EIR must discuss and evaluate inconsistencies between the proposed Project and its applicable general, specific, and regional plans. (Ibid. ["applicable" plans have been adopted and legally apply to a proposed project].) Here, existing land use designations allow for a much lower maximum density for the entire Project area. This lower density is consistent with the applicable general, regional, and specific plans, but entirely inconsistent with the high -density development proposed by this Project. Thus, because the FEIR evaluates the Project against a false or shifting baseline that is inconsistent with existing baseline conditions, the resulting analyses likewise fail, likely rendering the FOR legally insufficient. 3917.101 18509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 6 4. ULTIMATELY, THE CITY MAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INADEQUATE FEIR. CEQA compliance must occur before the City approves the Project. When a public agency gives a project "approval" it "commits to a definite course of action in regard to a project." (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs., § 1532, subd. (a).) In Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 CalAth 116, 130-132, the Court struck down a project, finding that the city violated CEQA because it had impermissibly committed itself to the project before completing an adequate CEQA review. While an applicant's consultant may prepare an EIR, that does not relieve the City from its independent duty to review and exercise judgment over the document. Indeed, the City must independently review, evaluate, and exercise judgment over the document and the issues it raises and addresses. (Friends of La Vina v. County of Los Angeles (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 1446, 1452; Pub. Res. Code, § 21082.1.) Ultimately, the City will be the one left holding the bag for certification of an inadequate EIR. (Mission Oaks Ranch, Ltd. v. County of Santa Barbara (1998) 65 Cal.AppAth 713, 723-724.) Here, the adequacy of the FEIR's Project description is inextricably linked to the adequacy of its analyses of environmental effects. If the description, baseline, and consistency requirements are not met —the resulting environmental analyses will be similarly flawed. (See Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d 376 [EIR failed to describe or analyze project accurately].) For example, if an EIR bases its cumulative impact analyses on general plan projections, it must explain why these projections function as a realistic predictor of related impacts. (See 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15130, subd. (b)(1)(B).) Moreover, a general plan's projections of future growth and related impacts are an inadequate basis for an EIR's cumulative impact analysis if the plan's projections do not cover a sufficiently wide area or exclude relevant data. (See Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692 [no explanation of why analysis of cumulative air quality impacts was limited to Central Valley]; Citizens to Preserve the Ojai v. County of Ventura (1985) 176 Cal.App.3d 421 [air quality analysis defective for failure to include contribution to pollution from offshore oil operations].) This is particularly true in situations like those at issue here, where the Project was originally envisioned at a higher density. Because the FEIR may rely on inaccurate estimates of projected development density, the analyses that flow from that estimate may be similarly flawed. In addition to the potential issues identified in this comment and the various additional comments submitted, the FEIR also may fail to identify, discuss, or mitigate potential significant impacts in the transportation and circulation section. For example, back-up of southbound traffic on N. Main Street between Edgewood Road and Walkie Way has the potential to significantly increase traffic and block intersections. The Project is proposing to reduce the distance between these intersections, while adding traffic to the back-up of traffic. In the technical studies for the project, information is calculated that 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 7 shows this back-up increasing into the future, but it was not evaluated or mitigated in the report text. This is important especially considering the overly wide intersection being created with the project at Walkie Way. Once the FEIR is revised to include an accurate Project description, then additional substantive issues may be raised and addressed. PSNA reserves its right to submit supplemental information and evidence up to the final public hearing on the Project. (See, e.g., Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management(1997) 60 Cal.AppAth 1109, 1119-1120 [applicant has right to present comments "prior to the close of the public hearing on the project."]; Coal. for Student Action v. City of Fullerton (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 1194, 1197 [same principle].) 5. THE FEIR SHOULD BE RECIRCULATED BECAUSE IT INCLUDES SIGNIFICANT NEW INFORMATION. An EIR must be recirculated if significant new information is added, in which case, further public and agency review is required. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21092.1; 14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15088.5.) The Public Resources Code says the following with respect to mandatory circulation prior to certification: When significant new information is added to an environmental impact report after notice has been given pursuant to Section 21092 and consultation has occurred pursuant to Sections 21104 and 21153, but prior to certification, the public agency shall give notice again pursuant to Section 21092, and consult again pursuant to Sections 21104 and 21153 before certifying the environmental impact report. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21092.1.) New information is "significant" where the EIR has changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment. (See Spring Valley Lake Assn. v. City of Victorville (2016) 248 Cal.AppAth 91, 106-109 [finding the revisions to the air quality analysis and hydrology and water quality impact analysis "problematic'] (hereafter "Spring Valley") [citing Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1129 (hereafter "Laurel Heights If')] ["the California Supreme Court] held that new information is 'significant,' within the meaning of section 21092.1, only if as a result of the additional information 'the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect.' (Accord, [Guidelines], § 15088.5, subd. (a).)"].) 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 8 For example, the Spring Valley Court found revisions to the air quality impacts analysis, as well as the hydrology and water quality impact analyses "problematic," as the new analyses constituted significant new information requiring recirculation under Section 21902.1. (Spring Valley, supra, 248 Cal.AppAth at pp. 108-109.) As to the air quality impacts analysis, the revisions analyzed the project's consistency with several general plan air quality policies and implementation measures. The Court found as follows with respect to the new information on air quality: As there is insufficient evidence to support the City's finding the project is consistent with these two implementation measures (see pt. I, ante), the information discloses a substantial adverse environmental effect. (Id. at p. 108.) Ultimately, the Court found that the revisions constituted significant new information requiring recirculation because their "breadth, complexity, and purpose" deprived the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment on an ostensibly feasible way to mitigate a substantial, adverse environmental effect. (Id. at pp. 108-109; see also Save our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.AppAth 99, 107 (hereafter "Save our Peninsula") ["We conclude that the EIR in this case did not comply with CEQA in its treatment of several critical water issues. Because of these inadequacies, the Board's action certifying the EIR and approving the project constituted an abuse of discretion."]; Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 CalAth 412, 421, as modified (Apr. 18, 2007) [finding that the Draft EIR must be revised and recirculated for public comment].) Similarly here, the FEIR incorporates substantial and significant new information and analyses that must be allowed to undergo further public review. For example, the FEIR for the first time appears to include an Arborist Report as a designed mitigation measure with respect to the existing mature trees that the Project proposes to remove. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-7; see also, id. at p. 2-38 [proposed statement of findings discussing certain Project Design Features "PDFs" that will be implemented like mitigation measures based on the Arborist Report].) This additional measure also purportedly identifies eight trees in an unhealthy condition recommended for removal. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-7.) The City also acknowledges that this removal will require further review by the Environmental and Transportation Advisory Committee, but that it "will occur at a later date[.]" (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-7.) But, CEQA contemplates a full and complete environmental review that occurs prior to action on the Project —not at some later date after the environmental document has already been certified. If the latter were true, CEQA would be rendered meaningless. Moreover, as the statement of overriding considerations acknowledges, the site could be used by one -special -status wildlife species: the western mastiff bat. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-57 [draft statement of overriding considerations].) In fact, the 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 9 species has a "the site could be used by one special -status wildlife species, the western mastiff bat, that has a low potential to roost in the large trees and palms[,]" many of which are being removed for the first time in the FEIR due to a new mitigation measure and Arborist's Report designating certain existing trees and palms as unhealthy and qualified for removal. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-57 [draft statement of overriding considerations].) Overall, the FEIR fails to adequately address significant concerns raised by state and federal agencies, independent scientists, conservation organizations, tribal representatives, and members of the public directly affected by this new mitigation measure. As a result of these and other related deficiencies, the FEIR may fail to fully inform the public and decision -makers of the Project's significant environmental impacts and to analyze and/or mitigate these impacts in accordance with CEQA. Failing to recirculate given these changes to the most significant and unavoidable impacts would result in an inability of the public or agencies to meaningfully comment on the Project's environmental impacts. The City should thus allow the FEIR to be recirculated and evaluated. 6. CONCLUSION. The adequacy of an EIR's project description is inextricably linked to the adequacy of its analyses of environmental effects. If the description, baseline, and consistency requirements are not met, the resulting environmental analyses will reflect the same mistakes. This is particularly true in situations like those at issue here, where the Project as originally envisioned is entirely different from the one presently before the City Council. Once a new EIR is prepared, then additional substantive issues may be raised and addressed. PSNA reserves its rights to submit further public comment at and up to the close of the record on the Project and requests formal, written notice in advance of any future meetings or notices of determination related to the Project. For the foregoing reasons, among others, PSNA respectfully requests that the City Council deny the proposed Project, consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendation below. 3917.101 / 8509864.1 Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 10 Very truly yours, Charles S. Krolikowski Cc: Mayor Miguel Pulido, mpulido(a)santa-ana.oro Mayor Pro Tern Juan Villegas, ivillegas(a)santa-ana.oro Councilmember David Penaloza, dpenaloza(ai7santa-ana org Councilmember Jose Solorio, JSolorio(a)santa-ana.oro Councilmember Vicente Sarmiento, vsarmiento(a)santa-ana org Councilmember Cecilia Iglesias, ciglesias(a)santa-ana.oro Park Santiago Neighborhood Association CSK:sIt 3917,101 / 8509864.1 ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL 2 Park Plaza, Suite 100 1 Irvine, CA 926141 P 949.476.2242 1 F 949.476,0443 1 www.ocbc.org November 19, 2019 The Honorable Miguel Pulido Mayor, City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988, M31 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: The Addington — SUPPORT Dear Mayor Pulido, Orange County Business Council (OCBC) is proud to support The Addington, a vital new housing project that supports Santa Ana's economic growth while helping to alleviate Orange County's severely strained housing market. One of OCBC's central initiatives is increasing the supply of workforce housing countywide; the City of Santa Ana has an opportunity to meet the challenges of the housing shortage head-on by approving The Addington. OCBC's 2019-20 Workforce Housing Scorecard, released in July 2019, illustrates a dire portrait for Orange County's future if new housing is not rapidly constructed. Santa Ana will see an increase in jobs and population over the next two decades, and ensuring that there is sufficient housing to accommodate this growth is crucial for the City's continued success. In the absence of housing, many members of Santa Ana's talented workforce are forced to live in neighboring counties, potentially causing them to seek jobs in other counties as well. OCBC realizes that The Addington is facing opposition from some members of the community. The opposition largely relies on myths surrounding residential development than many groups, including OCBC, have continually dispelled through data. OCBC urges the City Council to focus on the facts of the project —The Addington been significantly redesigned to create far less of an impact to the neighborhood than a by -right office project. OCBC asks the City Council to approve The Addington apartment project and consider the economic prosperity this project would provide for years to come. Sincerely, Alicia Berhow Senior Vice President of Government Affairs cc: The Honorable Juan Villegas, Mayor Pro Tern The Honorable Vicente Sarmiento, Councilmember The Honorable David Penaloza, Councilmember The Honorable Jose Solorio, Councilmember The Honorable Phil Bacerra, Councilmember The Honorable Cecilia Iglesias, Councilmember THE LEADING VOICE OF BUSINESS IN ORANGE COUNTY November 19, 2019 Dear Mayor and Council members, I am asking that you vote to STOP the 2525 North Main Street Project. Please listen to your neighbors and historically sensitive neighborhoods, NO Rezoning NO Apartments NO General Plan Amendment Sincerely, Ginelle Hardy Heninger Park, President ginelleann@gmail.com S >::i,: .. 1•, f3 N rx 0 En 0 U Ell ,4w=m0 W P Ing cn • r•1 � o b� o t) A Emmq 0 o o o z o o N 0 N �--� r O CO O v c2 -- co cd -1 9 N 9 ;j O �i Ncn Pml " O O O+ 04 0 04 U Em=4 a a E° W ca 134 Nrr FI 0 al �F co cn a.+ cu co w co �-4 W N o 0H 9 �Cd 77 C .n. vhundred '£ -T; 'ii V) .N � U co:, O ., w O� O 0 O u EO w U p 2 � Q � o O$4 EO a 40, L-4 CIO (U`' l yJV.• U2 � Vl rp 04 12= U }, C r, N � Emm4 rn q a %..v Emwq 00 z-q CO � a4 o cd N o 0 F a a 11 LA 9 A 2 "^ t• 11/19/2019 From: To: NO REZONING - 2525 N Main St v l6vy1 , O-ee[ 0, r 1 ' jr � 1I l ll I Ill jphlegal <jphlegal@aol.com> �% mpulido <mpulido@santa-ana.org>; vsarmiento <vsarmiento@santa-ana.org>; dpenaloza <dpenaloza@santa-ana.org>; jsolorio <jsolorio@santa-ana.org>; pbacerra <pbacerra@santa-ana.org>; jvillegas <jvillegas@santa-ana.org>; ciglesias <ciglesias@santa-ana.org>; eComments <eComments@santa-ana.org> Subject: NO REZONING - 2525 N Main St Date: Mon, Nov 18, 2019 5:27 pm As a 32-yr resident of Santa Ana, I care deeply about my City and its issues. While I thoroughly understand and support the need for additional housing units and am in favor of responsible development, I am strongly opposed to the proposed rezoning of this parcel from commercial to residential, which is directly contrary to the current General Plan and would set a dangerous precedent for the rest of the Museum District. Additionally, a project of this nature and mass does not belong adjacent to an established neighborhood like Park Santiago. Just because prior city councils have permitted massive apartment complexes to encroach upon, disrupt, and diminish some of our other vintage neighborhoods does not mean you have to. repeat such past mistakes. You should know --and do --better I am not a NIMBY and I fully support the proposed development of the many (thousands?) residential units planned for NW Memory Lane and the MainPlace Mall (which are about as close to my home as the 2525 Main St project) -- because these are good examples of more responsible development which would provide additional multi -family housing units (hopefully, to also include some low-income housing) which do not directly abut -and have a buffer from --establish SFH neighborhoods. Thank you for your consideration. Julie Humphreys 2112 N Ross St., Santa Ana, Ca 92706 714-541-3452 Salas, Diana From: Dale Helvig <helvig_denny@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 3:22 PM To: City Council; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Solorio, Jose; Bacerra, Phil; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; eComment Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Thai, Minh; Fregoso, Vince; Kelaher, Selena; Mark Earthlink McLoughlin Subject: 2019-11-19 Letter to City Council for 11/19/2019 CC Meeting Attachments: 2019-11-19 Letter to City CounciLpdf Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 19, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 811 Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. Analysis of 2525 N. Main Street, FEIR Attached is the Orosz Engineering Group analysis of the Clarification to the 2525 N. Main St. Final EIR. Respectfully, QR-a.t Dale A Helvig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) cc: citvcounciI Santa-ana.cre eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Dale Helvig 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com November 19, 2019 Mayor Pulido and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. Analysis of 2525 N. Main Street, FOR Attached is the Orosz Engineering Group analysis of the Clarification to the 2525 N. Main St. Final EIR. Respectfully, 0.0, 4 Idt Dale A Helvig Chairman, North Santa Ana Preservation Association (NSAPA) cc: citvcouncil@santa-ana ore eComments@santa-ana.org Kristine Ridge City Manager, Santa Ana Minh Thai Executive Director, Planning Vince Fregoso, Manager, Planning Selena Kelaher Associate Planner Mark McLoughlin Chair, Planning Commission Page 1 of 1 2019-12-19 Letter to City Council.docx `oee oroszeng i neeringgroup November 18, 2019 Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and City Council Members Santa Ana City Council 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: Magnolia at the Park —The Addington-2525 N. Main Street, FEIR Honorable Mayor Miguel Pulido and Members of the City Council: OEG Ref 19-702 Grosz Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG) has prepared the following comment letter for the subject project. We have reviewed the Traffic and Circulation analysis prepared for this project at the request of the North Santa Ana Preservation Alliance (NSAPA). We have prepared and reviewed over 200 Traffic Impact Analysis and Environmental Impact Report sections on Transportation and Circulation overthe past 38 years (32+years in the Southern and Central Coast areas of California). We have reviewed the Transportation and Circulation Section of the FOR and DEIR and the associated technical appendices for the subject project. Based on our review, the sections of the FOR and DEIR follow and address the proper standards of care associated with the preparation of traffic studies. SUMMARY The FEIR that is being considered has some significant omissions. In the Transportation and Circulation Section, there are potential significant impacts that has not identified, discussed or mitigated. The back up of southbound traffic on N. Main Street between Edgewood Road and Walkie Way has the potential to back-up traffic and block intersections. The project is proposing to reduce the distance between these intersections, while adding traffic to the back-up of traffic. In the technical studies for the project, information is calculated that shows this back-up increasing into the future but was not evaluated or mitigated in the report text. This is important especially considering the overly wide intersection being created with the project at Walkie Way. TECHNICAL EVALUATION The vehicle queuing analysis summarized in the FEIR Tables T-4, T-8 and T-11 omit a key piece of data. The southbound through traffic movement for the Main Street/Edgewood Road/1-5 ramps do not have any queuing information. This is an important movement since the project is proposing to reduce the distance between the Main Street intersections at Edgewood Road and at Walkie Way/Project Site Entrance by 90 feet. This is an omission in the FEIR. The existing spacing between these two intersections in the southbound direction is approximately 390 feet. With the project, this distance is proposed to be reduced by 90 feet, resulting in about 300 feet of available queue (backup of traffic) before the queue would impact the operation of the intersection. Below is a summary of the applicant calculated queues for the southbound through movement from the technical appendices. The bold numbers indicate that the expected back-up of traffic or queue would impact the Walkie Way/Project Site Entry intersection. PO Box 2934 . Prescott . AZ . 86302 . 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com Magnolia at the Park —The Addington November 18, 2019 Page 2 Available Queue Without Project I Available i Queue Existing AM _ 423' _ PM 75, Proposed SOT 390' 300' Op_ enin Year Conditions Project Quei Available Queue Without Project AM PM 456' 28T Available Queue Existinil Proposed SBT _ 39a' 300' 2040 Conditions P Available Without Project _Queue_ AM I PM SBT 1 390' Available With Project AM PM 390' 302' With Project AM PM 469' � 296' With Project AM PM SBT — Southbound Through Lanes Bald indicates the queue is expected to extend into or past the Walkje Way/Project Site Entry As shown in the Existing Conditions table, the addition of the project traffic and reduction of queuing distance between the Edgewood Road and Walkie Way/Project Site Entry Intersections would result in a project specific impact that has not been addressed or Identified in the DEIR nor FEIR. The project could reduce the overall queue by 33 feet, however with the 90 foot reduction in overall queuing distance, the queue would extend past the project site access; blocking any traffic from exiting the proposed project and limiting the exiting traffic from the Oiscovery Cube Orange County. In the Opening Year table above, the "with project" queue is 13 feet and 9 feet longer than the base opening year AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way intersection, both Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. Finally, in the 2040 Conditions table, the southbound through movement queue is increased by 27 feet and 14 feet for the AM and PM Peak Hour conditions, respectively. With the available queue distance being reduced by 90 feet with the project, and the queue extending past the Walkie Way Intersection, bath Walkie Way and the Project Access will be blocked during the AM Peak hour and the Project Access will be blocked during the PM Peak Hour. This is a project specific impact that is not addressed or discussed in the DEIR or FEIR. We would recommend that the FEIR not be accepted by the City Council, until these significant project specific impacts are discussed, addressed and mitigated. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us. Sincerely, I Stephen A. Orosi P.E., T.E., PTOE Traffic Engineer Grosz Engineering Group, Inc. =�4 PO Box 2934 . Prescott . AZ . 86302 . 805-680-1586 . steveoeg57@gmail.com CIVIL Salas, Diana From: Derrick Mrozinski <derrick.mrozinski@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 3:33 PM To: eComment Subject: NOII to 2525 N Main project I have lived in beautiful, historic Park Santiago for over 25 years. The ridiculous project proposed by the developer for 2525 N Main is unacceptable. The current use (and zoning) of the property has been acceptable since the 1980's and no change in zoning should be allowed. Thank you, Derrick Mrozinski 1 Salas, Diana From: Oliver Arceo <oliverarceo@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 4:08 PM To: eComment Subject: 2525 Main st Please vote NO to rezoning at 2525 N. Main Street. Oliver Areeo