My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE - #37
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2021
>
12/07/2021 Regular
>
CORRESPONDENCE - #37
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2021 5:07:58 PM
Creation date
12/6/2021 9:03:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Date
12/7/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
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
Dale Helvig <br /> 2536 N. Valencia St. Santa Ana CA 92706 <br /> 714-541-7254 helvig_denny@msn.com In <br /> ITEM 4 <br /> POLICY OS-1.11 FUNDING SOURCES <br /> "Set aside park funding to have monies on hand to acquire and develop parkland when opportunities <br /> arise and to leverage grant options." The city should take a proactive step and identify areas within the <br /> city that can be earmarked for parkland areas. Saying this will be covered by the Park Master Plan is not <br /> the same as having something in the General Plan. One can have vast amounts of funds but it means <br /> nothing if we allow commercial and residential development to buy up all available space. <br /> ITEM 5 <br /> Table OS-1. OPEN SPACE RESOURCES [page OS-8] <br /> The Note at the bottom of the table states: "The list of parks and acreage figures are accurate as of <br /> August 2020.All figures are subject to rounding." I recommend you take another look at the numbers. <br /> All areas are shown with two significant digits yet the subtotals are shown with either one or two <br /> significant digits. Check your math, the total parks/rec facilities acreage adds up to 409.65 acres versus <br /> the 409.2 acres shown, not much of a difference but every bit is important for a park deficient city. <br /> ITEM 6 <br /> Figure OS-2 WALKING DISTANCE TO PARK FACILITIES <br /> The key at the bottom of the page says: "Walking Distance From Existing or Proposed Park". Where are <br /> the proposed parks? Additionally, the area depicting the % mile around parks is inaccurate [look at <br /> Portola Park and Santiago Park]. <br /> ITEM 7 <br /> GOAL OS-2: Healthy, Safe and Inclusive Opportunities <br /> POLICY OS-2.4 URBAN AGRICULTURE AND HEALTHY FOODS <br /> "Expand urban agriculture opportunities in private development and public spaces." Language could be added <br /> to establish community gardens, or other public benefit use, on vacant/abandoned city property. <br /> ITEM 8 <br /> GOAL OS-3: Park Maintenance, Stewardship, and Sustainability <br /> POLICY OS-3.8 NATURALIZING THE SANTA ANA RIVER <br /> Request this be expanded to include the Santiago Creek. <br /> ITEM 9 <br /> Table OS-2. RELATED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES [page OS-15] <br /> TYPO. "Goal OS-1, for example, is supported not only by the policies listed in this element (OS-1.1 <br /> through OS-3.6)". Should be "...through OS-3.8)" <br /> TYPO. Open Space Goal OS-1 is not accurate, it has the words found in the 2020 draft versus what is <br /> listed in the 2021 draft. It should say. "Provide an integrated system of accessible parks, recreation <br /> facilities, trails, and open space to serve the City of Santa Ana." <br /> Page 2 of 5 -II <br /> 2021-12-07 Letter to City Council-GP Comments on Open Space Element <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.