HomeMy WebLinkAbout5 - PUBLIC COMMENT_MELLOFrom:Flores, Dora
To:Bernal, Sarah; Fregoso, Vince; Thai, Minh; Gutierrez, Fatima; Pezeshkpour, Ali; !City Clerk
Subject:FW: Planning Commission Item No. 5
Date:Monday, March 30, 2020 12:53:13 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Good Afternoon,
The following communication pertaining to the Planning Commission meeting, has been
received for your review and consideration.
Kind Regards,
Dora Flores|Support Staff
Clerk of the Council Office | 20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5278 | dflores5@santa-ana.org
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: Michael Mello [mailto:le_canuck@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 12:47 PM
To: eComment <ecomment@santa-ana.org>
Cc: Villegas, Juan <JVillegas@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Planning Commission Item No. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC COMMENT Item No. 5.:
My name is Michael Mello, and I live in Washington Square.
Why the rush now with this project? One Broadway Plaza first won approval from
the city in 2004. If such a project were deemed truly necessary during the past 15
years, it would have been built already.
In a private conversation before last month’s “Sunshine Meeting”, I had the
opportunity to ask Michael Harrah why he’s attempting to revive One Broadway
after all this time. He replied that it’s because he has “put $80 million and 17 years
into this”. Is that a good reason for irreversibly changing a historical part of the
city?
Even in the staff report for this agenda item, the city’s top argument in favor of the
project is that it “will enhance and provide a positive reinforcement of the City’s
image around the Midtown area.” Is that a good reason to transform Santa Ana
forever?
Instead, I see several reasons not to approve this project, including the creation of
gridlock in an already traffic-choked portion of the city and impacts to air quality
and city services, not to mention the two schools that are immediate neighbors. In
addition, the city has required only minor revisions to an environmental impact
report created more than 15 years ago. Why would a project of this magnitude be
undertaken without a new, up-to-date environmental impact report?
Lastly, the COVID-19 has changed life as we know it for the foreseeable future.
People are afraid to leave their homes for fear of catching a potentially deadly virus,
and the city is forced to hold “virtual” meetings. Is the midst of a worldwide crisis
really an appropriate time to consider a project with such far-reaching
consequences? Again: Why the rush?
I urge you to vote “no” on this item, or at least table it until the city is no longer on
an emergency footing.
Thank you.