My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2 - COMBINED PUBLIC COMMENTS_2525 N MAIN STREET
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
Planning Commission (2002-Present)
>
2019
>
01-14-19
>
2 - COMBINED PUBLIC COMMENTS_2525 N MAIN STREET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2019 4:09:36 PM
Creation date
8/16/2019 4:04:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PBA
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.
/
379
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
From:Kelaher, Selena <br />To:Bernal, Sarah <br />Subject:FW: 2525 N Main comments <br />Date:Thursday, January 10, 2019 4:45:34 PM <br /> <br /> <br />Selena Kelaher, AICP <br />City of Santa Ana <br />Planning and Building Agency | M20 <br />20 Civic Center Plaza | Post Office Box 1988 | Santa Ana, CA 92702 <br />skelaher@santa-ana.org | Direct Phone: (714) 667-2740 <br /> <br />From: Roger Allen [mailto:polopapa@hotmail.com] <br />Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 3:52 PM <br />To: Kelaher, Selena <skelaher@santa-ana.org> <br />Subject: 2525 N Main comments <br /> <br />Selena Kelaher, Associate Planner <br />City of Santa Ana, Planning and Building Agency <br />PO Box 1988 <br />Santa Ana, CA 92702 <br /> <br />This letter is regarding the final environmental impact report and the planning commission <br />meeting for the proposed development at 2525 N Main Street in Santa Ana. <br /> <br />My previous letter regarding the draft environmental impact report was included in the final <br />report but a couple of my comments were either misunderstood or directly dismissed. Here <br />are comments regarding the response in the environmental impact report (EIR). <br /> <br />My original comments note the historical aesthetics of the area it also notes the concern of <br />large multi-story buildings being surrounded by single and two story houses. The response in <br />the final EIR totally dismisses the historical part of my comment because the existing building <br />is on the site is ‘Modern’. There is no allowance or comment about the existing building as a <br />low rise brick building. With the setback and landscape of the current parking lot, the building <br />and grounds have less impact on the aesthetics of the neighborhood than a multi-story, <br />concrete and glass building with less setback. <br /> <br />My original letter noted several concerns regarding the safety and population density of the <br />project. My comment included reference to the historic Santiago Creek flooding and the retail <br />changes that are occurring just north of the project site at the main place mall. The response <br />directly dismisses these comments or ignores them as not relevant. My original comment <br />even noted the city code for the population density calculation. Interesting that the reference <br />is now a broken link and cannot be accessed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.