75F - ONE BROADWAY PLAZA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

02/27/2017 11:27 FAX 1lJ002 Roberta Reed 1205 South Parton Street Santa Ana, Califomia 92707 Planning Commission City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92701 June 14, 2004 Members of the Planning Commission: Tonight, you have before you for Consideration the One aroadway Plaza Development Agreement. On February 24, 2004, by majority vote the Planning Commission recommended the One aroadway Plaza project for approval. While I realize that the actual merits of the project are not up for consideration tonight, I feel first compelled 10 again reiterate my belief that this project. in its proposed location, is not good for the City of Santa Ana and its citiZens. One clarification is In order: Page 3 of the Request for Planning Commission Action st<lites that ïhis agreement has incorporated the major issues raised at the March City Council hearing as well as those issues raised by the Ad Hoc CommIttee." This statement Is false. While the Development Agreement addreS$es some of the issues raised at the March Public Hearing, in no way doe$ it address the majority of the concerns stated that night The majority of concerns addressed the inadequacies of the EIR document and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, as well as the number of significant environmental impacts that were not mitigated in the EIR. As such, these issues have not been addressed by the Development Agre$ment, and it is no way incorporates anything close to all of the major issues raised at the Public Hearing. While I believe that the members of the Ad Hoc Committee and City Staff made an honest effort to draft an 8greement that protects the interests of the city and Its citizens, no development agreement will be able to protect us from the fact that the EIR does not provide mitigations for many of the significant environmental impacts identified for this project. Because there are no mitigations proposed for many of these &ignificant Impacts, the Development Agreement does not contain any provisions for these significant impacts. For this reaSOn, the Development Agreement is not adequate, ilnd not supportable as a tool of good planning. Specific to the Development Agreement, I have the following comments: Improvement #4 in Exhibit C calls for installing a new traffic signal at Broadway and the parking structure, as previously described in the EIR. On page 12 of the One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District document, Point (n) requires the Developer to "install 7SF-65