CORRESPONDENCE- 75A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

April 16, 2020 Connie Major 923 N. Olive Public Hearing #75A One Broadway Plaza April 21st City Council meeting, Council -members, I do not agree with the staff recommendation to approve the project without further study and protection for Santa Ana residents. At your April 218t city council meeting you will be able to decide and direct the future of the 37- story tower, One Broadway Plaza , (OBP). I have been following OBP since the beginning as I have lived in Santa Ana since 1976. Here are some of my concerns. Traffic: I am pleased with the Planning Commissions recommendations that the developer will be required to provide $300,000 per neighborhood for traffic mitigation plans and implementation for the heavily affected areas and including the Logan neighborhood. But, there have been no changes to the requirements to improve the flow of traffic on the main routes to and from the 5 freeway and 22 freeway. The traffic study that city staff is using as its basis for a recommendation of approval is now terribly old. When written in 2004 it projected out to 2020. That is now! So you can see the traffic study does not look at all the new developments in the midtown area, plus there will be more after three years of tower construction. The traffic study is outdated and needs to be redone! The staff addendum is not adequate. With 415 proposed housing units in the tower and the another 1,731 housing units approved or in process in the midtown area, there is no question that to meet community needs, to keep traffic flowing, we need a new traffic study that goes out to 2030 or more, and addresses the growth of current background traffic volumes. Council - members, do not approve this project without a current traffic study of future projections to develop a proper traffic mitigation plan. 2. Affordable Housing: The developer is opting out of including affordable housing units in the tower and is proposing to pay in -lieu fees. This is a buy-out! At the Sunshine Meeting he pointed out proudly that he was including affordable housing units. He needs to stick to that. With the city more and more built out, each housing development needs to accept and include it's required minimum number of affordable units! Please do not accept in -lieu fees when we have a great opportunity to meet basic community needs in a small building footprint. In addition, the units need to be scattered throughout the housing floors, not insulated. We all should be able to understand that affordable housing does not mean "low - class" citizens. Council -members, do not accept the buy-out, demand affordable housing be included. 3. Looking at General Plan Goal 1. To promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs. I am pleased that the Planning Commission voted for the developer's per -living unit park fees be used in the local area of the tower. Perhaps a paved parking lot can be made into a green park and those who parked there be able to use the project's 9- floor parking structure. Or perhaps demolish an existing run-down apartment building to create a park and allow those residents the opportunity to occupy the affordable housing units in the tower, allowing them to stay in the neighborhood. Council -member, Please do not approve this tower project without including affordable housing and a current traffic study, these are reasonable demands.