My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 37 - EIR No. 2020-03 and GPA No.2020-06 Santa Ana General Plan Update
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2021
>
12/07/2021 Regular
>
Item 37 - EIR No. 2020-03 and GPA No.2020-06 Santa Ana General Plan Update
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/9/2024 8:57:39 AM
Creation date
8/17/2023 12:02:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Item #
37
Date
12/7/2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
591
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
given that the uses are being updated so it makes sense to incorporate the Park <br />Space as well. (See attached Exhibits for specifics). <br />I have attached a few exhibits from a Power Point presentation made by <br />Planningy Staff .... the map shows how deficient the park land is within the City <br />limits...,umetimps a picture is worth a thousand words... it states "Recreation as <br />Significant Environmental Impact". This absolutely needs to be rectified and <br />actual Park land identified, dedicated and 'built out in this General Plan Update. <br />Please direct Staff to include this specific language. <br />The Park Land Ratio Exhibit downgrades the amount of park land from 1.03 <br />acres per 1,000 people to .08 acres per 1,000.....how dons this help?? Please <br />direct Staff to keep the amount of park space at 1.03 acres per 1,000. <br />The "Potential Policies & Actions" for the ©pen Space Element Exhibit is a good <br />start. I would recommend that you direct Staff to incorporate this in the General <br />Plan Update and make sure that these Policies are being followed and <br />implemented across the board so that Park land is actually identified, dedicated <br />and built out. <br />Lastly, Roof Top Amenities on multi -family buildings are not open space for the <br />public but an amenity for the residents who live in the buildings and should not be <br />counted as open space/park space (as part of the City's deficit of open <br />space) .. its an amenity to the tenants only, not the public. I would recommend <br />that there is clarification in the General Plan Update about this in order to <br />alleviate confusion and protect the actual need for Park land dedication. <br />would be happy to further discuss my recommendations which I believe, will help <br />shape the future of Santa Ana and in general, are good basic planning principles. I trust <br />that you will guide Planning Staff to incorporate the above comments in order to fulfill <br />the destiny of the General Plan Update. <br />Thank you for your service and attention to my suggestions.. <br />Sincerely, <br />Diane kin <br />29-year resident of Santa Ana <br />(14-914-8047 <br />Enclosures <br />cc: Kristine Ridge <br />Minh Thai <br />L <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.