HomeMy WebLinkAbout5 - PUBLIC COMMENT_BROWNFrom: Gomez Daisy
To: Bernal Sarah; Freaoso VinceArl Piotrkowskl
Cc: Uty Clerk; Thai Min
Subject: Planning Commisslon comment- Review of One Broadway Project
Date: Saturday, March 28, 2020 9:47:03 AM
Attachments: 1585411181783blob.ioo
1585411380642blob.ioa
1585411181783biob.ioa
1585411380642biob ioa
Good Morning,
The fallowing communication pertaining to the Planning Commission meeting, has been received for
your review and consideration.
Best,
Daisy
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any typos.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Archie Brown <archiedbrown@yahoo.com>
Date: March 28, 2020 at 9:14:14 AM PDT
To: "Penaloza, David" <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>, eComment
<eColnment@santa-ana.org>, "Fregoso, Vince" <VFregoso@Santa-ana.org>
Subject: Review of One Broadway Project
Dear Councilman Penaloza, Planning Commission, and other Civic Leaders,
I have reviewed the planning staff report for the updated One Broadway plan which now
includes a residential component. I did not support the original project and I still would like
to see it reduced in height by half. As a single building, it would create a visual blight and
would be extremely incompatible with low and mid -rise buildings in the Mid -Town corridor. It
also came as no surprise that Mr Harrah was never able to find office tenants to support its
construction. He needed to lease this building at rates typical negotiated at fashionable
coastal office localities and far and above markets the rates at Santa Ana's best business
locations (i.e. Main/MacArthur and 1st/Grand).
Nevertheless, I do not see any grounds for the city to outright deny the proposed changes,
since Mr. Harrah has entitlements for a more intensive development. I am still very
concerned that this project gets built in a sub -optimum manner that ultimately falls short of
becoming the prestigious address the city desires. Santa Ana would take another hit in its
reputation if One Broadway would remain dormant if any considerable length of time. To
this end, any conditions or safeguards that the city could impose to ensure that we have
highest quality building and as well as office tenants is paramount.
I also believe that if we are to allow this 500-foot tower, the best way to mitigate its negative
visual impact will be to eventually allow additional multiple high-rises to cluster around it. A
single building towering above its neighbors overpowers its surroundings and will create an
uncomfortable spatial and contextual relationship. In contrast, the grouping of multiple tall
buildings intensifies the urban landscape creating an iconic focal point. Clustering building
with the right proportioned heights provides order and harmony. It delineates an attractive
cosmopolitan silhouette that shapes the cities identity. Thus, I urge the city to thoroughly
explore this change in land use as you review this project as well as update Santa Ana's
general plan.
Thank for your time and consideration. Your decisions will be pivotable in setting the
direction of our community.
Example of poorly integrated office tower. (Taipei 101 building)
Example of properly integrated city skyline (Pittsburgh PA)
46
FL
r` 4k � � —
�r
V4A
qplb
• ilop
r,Vqf1
!- � • l done" 4Mr .e ;ter e"k
r
s• r
F� r ;
! 0
■ 111 � a
Tom#db
a
� 4ZiT yam• � •"' ..
pr J J y■ate+{F1��;yjj""! _
r •
NW -
Is Ol is I
t�tr Co:
I I, 11 `
a
ftl ,
Lra1s'ti1mG