My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
75D_ Prensentation By Applicant
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
11/19/2019
>
75D_ Prensentation By Applicant
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2020 3:16:37 PM
Creation date
11/21/2019 9:13:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Date
11/19/2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
The Addington <br />MYTH v REALITY <br />MYTH <br /># <br />REALITY <br />12x Less Traffic Than By -Right Medical Office; 4x Less Than By -Right <br />Apartments Will Create A Traffic Impact <br />1 <br />Office, 5.5x Less Than Retail; No Impact To 16 Nearby Intersections <br />Modernized and Safer - Has Been Approved By Public Works <br />Walkie Way Intersection Will Be Unsafe <br />2 <br />Follows Best Practice Safety Requirements <br />Project Will Remove Palm Trees on Edgewood <br />3 <br />All Palm Trees On Edgewood Remain <br />4 <br />Entry To Cube Parking Lot Too Close To Edgewood <br />Exceeds All Minimum Requirements <br />Cube Has Used Lot for 10 Years Without Incident; New Pedestrian <br />Unsafe Pedestrian Access To Cube From Parking Lot <br />5 <br />Egress & Staging Will Be Provided As Part Of $1 mm Upgrades <br />Developer Purchased Site Out From Under Cube <br />6 <br />Cube Had Site Under Contract & Assigned To Applicant <br />Cube Is Only Leasing Parking Lot <br />7 <br />Cube Purchasing Lot With State Grant <br />Will <br />8 <br />Spending $1.4mm In Upgrades, 24-Hr Security Plus "Eyes On The Park" <br />Park Remain Dangerous <br />Finally Return Park To Being A Safe Place <br />9 <br />Not Unusual; 24 GPAs Since 2010 Due To 37-Year Old General Plan <br />A General Plan Amendment & Change Of Zone <br />Unusual In Santa Ana <br />10 <br />Density Is Far Lower Than Recently Approved Projects, <br />The Project Is Too Dense For The Site <br />Including Legacy That Is Next To Low Density Residential <br />Santa Ana Has One Of The Biggest Shortages In The State; <br />Santa Ana Does Not Need Any More Housing <br />11 <br />Housing Ratio Of 4.5 People For Every 1 Home; 2 Jobs Per 1 Home <br />Good Urban Planning Does Not Put <br />12 <br />Multi -Family Is Used As A Buffer Between Commercial Uses <br />Multi -Family Next To Single Family <br />And Single Family All Over So Cal <br />This Is The First Project With SD Of This Density <br />13 <br />Irrelevant &Not True - 651 Sunflower @ 63 Du/Acre <br />Next To Single Family <br />This Project Is More Dense Than Other Projects <br />14 <br />Not True - Less Dense Than Countless Others Throughout City; <br />Near Single Family <br />Legacy, Line & Dozens More <br />15 <br />Harvard, MIT, ULI & Other Studies Establish Opposite; <br />Multi -Family Lowers Property Values <br />Of Adjacent Single Family <br />Selling Price For PS Homes Increased 11 % Since Last October <br />16 <br />Not True -Produces 2.5x That Of Office; $11.6mm Over 25 Years <br />Multi -Family Will Not Produce Significant Revenue <br />To City's General Fund <br />Apartments Will Ruin The Historic Character Of The Area <br />17 <br />Allowing Properties To Be Vacant & In Disrepair Ruins Communities <br />Has Not Been Sensitive To The Community <br />11 Demands Of Adjacent Homeowners Met; <br />18 <br />Project <br />50% Of Project Reduced Along With Countless Other Revisions <br />The EIR Had Aesthetics As An Unavoidable Impact <br />19 <br />EIR Found "Change" But Not Identified As A Negative; <br />& This Is Proof That The Project Is Bad <br />Just Different, Not Bad <br />20 <br />Professional On -Site Management Will Use Industry Best Practices <br />Apartments Will Have Multiple Families <br />To Ensure That Only Residents On Lease Reside In Units <br />Apartment Residents Are Different Than Homeowners <br />21 <br />Target Residents Are Professionals Working In <br />Adjacent Office Or Hospitals <br />Nobody Will Pay That Much To Live There <br />22 <br />Similar Units All Throughout OC Renting For Much More; <br />Site Is An Ideal Location <br />24-Hour Presence, Designed Per Public Safety Design Standards <br />Residential Will Not Solve The Crime Issue In The Area <br />23 <br />The Majority Of Park Santiago Opposes Project <br />24 <br />1,175 Park Santiago Homes, 4,108 Residents: <br />Less Than 5% Voice Opposition <br />The Project Is Not Supported City -Wide <br />25 <br />Community Leaders Here Tonight In Support, <br />Multiple Letters Of Support; Over 1,000 Signatures In A Week <br />Applicant Has Requested That Mitigation Agreements <br />Confidentiality Was Done At The Request Of The Homeowners <br />With Adjacent Residents Are Confidential <br />26 <br />Due To Pressure From NSAPA <br />Santa Ana Office Vacancy 7x That Of Multi -Family; <br />Office Development At 2525 Works <br />27 <br />2700 N Main Has 54% Vacancy; 1200 N. Main Has 92% Vacancy <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.