CORRESPONDENCE - 75E (IN OPPOSITION)

Home Browse Search

adjacent homes on Spurgeon, impacting their environment, and the Neighborhood Character section acknowledges The Addington is not in character with the neighborhood. • Page 75E-284 While Park Santiago is not currently designated as a historic neighborhood, the Historic Neighborhoodsection acknowledges that almost 1,200 homes within its boundaries are more than 50 years old. • Page 75E-284, Project Accessnotes that the proposed vehicular access is right -in, right -out on Main Street and this would create u -turns at Walkie Way and at Edgewood. This would be hazardous and further impede traffic. Page 75E-284 Use of Santiago Park states that a second proposed access would require review by the City Parks and Recreation Department as well as the National Park Service. We should not be eroding well-established parks to convenience a developer. • Page 75E-285 Traffic indicates that the new development will generate almost 3,000 new daily trips. It is a certainty that a significant number of these trips will occur through Park Santiago streets. We already have a significant problem with cut -through traffic, including speeding and stop sign violations. This project would make the problem explode. • Page 75E-286 Table 9: Parking Per SAMC Section 41-1322 Multi -Family Dwellings states that the required parking per the municipal code cited is 1,420 spaces or 2.86 per unit. The developer is allocating a mere 1.86 spaces per unit, which is going to cause residents AND THEIR GUESTS to spill over into Park Santiago streets to park. • Page 75E-289 Staff Recommended Changes states that the access to Edgewood Road has been removed, but it has not! It is still showing as Option C in the development plan. The changes also indicate the height of the building has been reduced, when as previously noted, there is one building at the northeast corner facing the single-family homes on Spurgeon that remains at five stories. Also note that there is a six -story mezzanine "rooftop amenity deck" which will decimate the privacy of residents of Park Santiago. A parking management plan to include valet service has been also recommended. This is a new concept to multi -family dwellings but there is no further details on how this will be regulated or monitored by the City. • Page 75E-290 the Economic Analysis states that the project will result in approximately $33.5 million generated to the General Fund over a 25 -year period. This is only $1.34 million per year, a fairly modest amount in return for the destruction of one of the best neighborhoods in Santa Ana. • Page 75E-292 the Conclusionindicates that the Development Agreement provides for "traffic diversion" through Park Santiago but I was unable to locate details on this new promise. And if the traffic impact is less than significant as claimed by the EIR, why would this be necessary? Clearly there will be a severely detrimental traffic impact to Main Street and to Park Santiago streets. It is also interesting that the name of the project keeps changing: first it was "Restoration at the Park," then "Magnolia" and now "The Addington." Why the frequent changes? Why is the developer deliberately creating this confusion? I ask that you abide by the recommendation of the Planning Commission and reject this unsuitable development. Respectfully, Darcie L. Cancino