CORRESPONDENCE - 75E (IN OPPOSITION)

Home Browse Search

https://outlook.live.com/mail/sentitems/id/AQMkADAwATEO... htt 1 /www.santaana.orp/sites/default/files/finance/budget/2018-2019/FY18-19 adopted budget.pdf Even assuming the City administers the funds in an appropriate manner, consider that this is a one time payment. That's it. Once its spent, it is spent. As to park funding, I think this is somewhat of a red herring. The developer is investing in the park because he thought he could get neighborhood support and he wants to sell his tenants on an attractive park. However, a 1.4 million spend is spent once. That's it. An office developer would similarly have to pay impact fees, generate tax revenue which, if judiciously used, should support park improvements globally. Moreover, any bite at the apple by the City creates opportunities to finagle park improvements. The City is also free to raise its impact fee rates and to assess impact fees for affordable housing against commercial projects. By way of example, the City of Napa reasoned that commercial development creates a need for housing and charges commercial developers a fee which supports their affordable housing initiatives. I don't know that I would support this approach as I think it is questionable and cuts against encouraging business to locate here, but it is certainly an option. I agree with Tim that aesthetics are subjective. I will however state that any project looks great on paper. The problem with this project is that it appears (in my humble opinion) to be cheap. These are essentially a series of slightly angled monoliths in sequence. There is nothing aesthetically or architecturally interesting and this was done deliberately because it keeps construction costs low. As to fit with the neighborhood, I think it is wise to start with an assumption. A decision made regarding the site will last for 50-75 years at the very least. This is a marquis property. I traced the lineage of the property back to the early 1900s. The property was used as a grocery store, small car dealership/auto repair, and a funeral home before Wells Fargo. It was designed to operate as a buffer between Main Street and the single family neighborhoods (Park Santiago among others). I don't think this project qualifies as being a particularly good buffer. Tim, I also respectfully disagree with you as to changing dynamics regarding cars and it is simply not reasonable to engage in projections based on a population for a project that has not been built yet. Of course, I can certainly envision the tenants having electric cars. However, start with the location of the project itself. Other than busses, there is no meaningful mass transit link. The project is situated at a crossroads to major highways. The addition of parking spaces was a step in the right direction but I respectfully disagree with your analogies. I also think that guests of the units will park on the street—thereby exacerbating the parking shortage. People are largely impatient and take the path of least resistance. Why drive all around/up and down a garage when I could just as easily park on Edgewood or somewhere else in Park Santiago? In discussing this issue with fellow neighbors in Floral Park, I understand that we have the privilege and honor of paying for parking passes because the apartment complexes just outside of Floral Park were underparked. You should not delegate responsibility to code enforcement or peer pressure within the building to make the neighbors whole. Instead, good planning by the City that prevents these problems is preferable. I share your view as to greed and money. There is nothing wrong with investing, developing, and profiting. Nothing at all. However, the developer bought the property by speculating. It seems to me that the developer sees the City as being desperate for short-term infusions of cash, and will do anything to get more housing. Anything. Tim ... look at the density for heavens sake. I could see this in downtown but this project in this particular location makes no sense to me. Tim, I also share your view regarding the newest generation. However, millennials are motivated by a number of factors. One of those factors is the ability to find a good job. Again, does eliminating a marquis property from an office or some other form of commercial use make sense in that regard? I share your view regarding nice things. Mother's Market has been a tremendous asset and I will go as far as saying that 2525 may boost some of the other businesses like Barnes and Nobles which is likely on its last legs. 4 of 6 2/11/2019, 3:25 PM