CORRESPONDANCE - 60A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 18, 2019 Page 8 POLICY FRAMEWORK • Policy HE-1.7: "Historic Preservation. Support preservation and enhancement of residential structures, properties, street designs, lot patterns, and other visible reminders of neighborhoods that are considered local historical or cultural resources." (Housing Element, at p. 43.) Similar inconsistencies should also cause the City concern. For example, the Project contemplates public access to the City's Santiago Park via the proposed development. This private -to -public access creates obvious problems with respect to maintenance costs and liability, but the Project as contemplated does not appear to address those issues. Moreover, the Project documents frequently reference the Project as a District Center, although its current iteration does not contemplate a mixed -use component, a requirement of any District Center development. For the foregoing reasons, among others, any approval of the Project would be inconsistent with and continue to violate the City's General Plan, 3. THE PROJECT APPROVAL MAY SUBJECT THE CITY TO SUBSTANTIAL LITIGATION. In addition to the problems with respect inconsistency with the General Plan as identified above, the City's actions described herein may give rise to a compensable regulatory taking. Specifically, the City's approval of the Project will intentionally interfere with the property rights of the surrounding property owners, depressing the value of the properties wherein some or all economic, uses of the will be impacted under the Penn Central and/or Kavanau tests. (See, e.g., Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City (1978) 438 U.S. 104, 123; Kavanau V. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (1997) 16 CalAth 761, 711-777; see also Jefferson Street Ventures, LLC v. City of Indio (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1175.) Evidence of this depression in value has already been provided to the City Council. (See City Council, Sept. 3, 2019, [public comment re Park Santiago price devaluation resulting from Project].) In fact, on September 3, 2019, public comment provided in the formal record for the Project detailed the potential home price devaluation that would result. (Ibid.) Here, the Park Santiago neighborhood consists of approximately 1100 homes at an average value of $700,000 each. If the value of these homes is depressed by even as little as 5%, or approximately $35,000, that would result in potential losses of up to $38.5 million. (See ibid.) As such, the City may have significant exposure for inverse condemnation for injury to property interests caused by the City's failure to properly and thoroughly consider the impacts of this Project on surrounding properties, although such impacts are required to be considered under Division 26 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code ("SAMC"). (See Knick v. Township of 4398.101 18504501.2