My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Packet 3.6.25
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
Planning Commission (2002-Present)
>
2025
>
Packet 3.6.25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2025 9:28:40 AM
Creation date
9/2/2025 9:26:19 AM
Metadata
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.
/
249
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
2 <br />business out of 120+ businesses was their only example. The business which has occupied our <br />building at 911 Poinsettia is an industrial distributor, selling hose, fittings, valves and the like to <br />customers who are repairing their hydraulic and pneumatic equipment. The business gets one <br />UPS and FEDEX delivery in the morning, and one pickup in the late afternoon. That is less <br />UPS, FEDEX, and Amazon traffic than any Orange County residential neighborhood these <br />days. The business is quiet and clean and has never had a complaint from the surrounding <br />neighborhoods. I know that many of the businesses in the Transit District are just as quiet and <br />clean. <br /> <br />We feel that the city is acting in bad faith here, threatening our constitutional rights as property <br />owners. The reason change has not occurred in the last 15 years since the Renaissance Plan is <br />that buying up property in the transit district for a residential project does not pencil at current <br />market values for the property. If the city thinks that artificially driving down the value of the <br />existing properties so that residential developers may consider developments in the transit <br />district is fair to the existing property owners, they are missing current realities. One glaring <br />example of this transpired in Irvine recently when the city council was considering a large <br />warehouse taking up a city block in the Irvine Business Center (IBC). The city denied approval <br />but negotiated with the owners that if they built a residential project they could keep their <br />industrial zoning for the property. The city did this to avoid litigation for devaluing the <br />property. The City of Santa Ana may want to consider things from this perspective as well. <br /> <br />Mark Law <br />FLP Investments LLC <br />714-812-2014 <br />mlaw92626@gmail.com <br /> <br />Planning Commission 1 – 230 3/6/2025 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.