HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 - WORK STUDY_114 AND 117 EAST FIFTH STREET_COMMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CORRESPONDENCE
10/14/2019
ITEM NO. 3 – WORK STUDY SESSION ON THE PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT LOCATED AT
114 AND 117 E. FIFTH STREET
Comments received by established deadline
First Name Last Name Organization Favor Oppose General
Maria Perez Chevitas X
David Elliot Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce X
Tim Rush
X
Jeffrey Dickman
X
Tim Rush
X
TOTAL
2 2 1
Page 1 of 1
From:Chevita Juice
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:First American Site
Date:Friday, October 04, 2019 7:24:29 PM
Dear Chairman McLoughlin and Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission:
I am a small business owner of Chevitas, located on 4th street between Sycamore and
Broadway in DTSA. My restaurant serves bagels, sandwiches and fresh juices. As a small
business owner, I invest all my time and effort here in downtown Santa Ana. I want to
mention that I also live in DTSA and I love the vibrant community here.
I am urging you to support and expedite the Toll Brothers downtown Multi-family project
replacing the First American site. This site has been vacant for so many years and I know that
once the Toll Brothers complete their project, more people will move here to live, work and
play.
Please support this project now as this will benefit not only me but the entire community as
well.
Sincerely,
Maria Perez
Chevitas Business Owner
714-574-5113
1631 W. Sunflower Ave #C-35, Santa Ana, CA 92704 (714) 541-5353
October 10, 2019
Chairman McLoughlin and Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
P.O. Box 1988, M31
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Sent via email: sbernal@santa-ana.org
RE: Toll Brothers Apartment Living’s project at 4th and Main
Dear Chairman McLoughlin and Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission:
On behalf of the Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce:
The Toll Brothers Apartment Living’s project is a result of a long-term and well considered
planning process adopted by the City to implement the City and community’s vision for downtown.
This plan was adopted with input from the Santa Ana businesses and surrounding neighborhoods
over a multiple year consensus building process.
We cannot afford to miss this opportunity to bring a mixed-use community into our downtown that
implements this plan. Our downtown needs this project and needs it without delay.
The City and business community have invested millions of dollars in infrastructure in order to
achieve a thriving and successful downtown. From the property owners’ payment of property tax
bonds to build our parking structures, to the streetcar, bicycle, sidewalk and street improvements,
we all have made a heavy commitment to a successful downtown.
Toll Brothers Apartment Living’s mixed-use project is exactly what we envisioned. We support the
architecture, the parking plan, the voluntary contribution of 5% of their project to be affordable to
very low-income persons, and the City’s interpretation of the historic nature of the First American
Title building.
Again, we urge your support of this project without delay.
Sincerely,
David Elliott
President/CEO
Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce
From:Chevita Juice
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:First American Site
Date:Friday, October 04, 2019 7:24:29 PM
Dear Chairman McLoughlin and Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission:
I am a small business owner of Chevitas, located on 4th street between Sycamore and
Broadway in DTSA. My restaurant serves bagels, sandwiches and fresh juices. As a small
business owner, I invest all my time and effort here in downtown Santa Ana. I want to
mention that I also live in DTSA and I love the vibrant community here.
I am urging you to support and expedite the Toll Brothers downtown Multi-family project
replacing the First American site. This site has been vacant for so many years and I know that
once the Toll Brothers complete their project, more people will move here to live, work and
play.
Please support this project now as this will benefit not only me but the entire community as
well.
Sincerely,
Maria Perez
Chevitas Business Owner
714-574-5113
SUMMARY:
Meeting between Toll Brothers, Preserve Orange County, Santa Ana Historical Preservation
Society, and Historic French Park
at Santa Ana Planning Department / Oct 1, 2019
Attending:
Mike McCann, Regional Director Acquisition & Development/Toll Bros. Apartment Communities
Alison Young, Associate Director and Past President/Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society
(SAHPS)
Tim Rush, Associate Board Member/Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society (SAHPS); board
member/Preserve Orange County (POC)
Alan Hess, architect; Commissioner/California State Historical Resources Commission; board
chair/Preserve Orange County (POC); author of 20 books on architectural history
Robert Imboden, Historic Resources consultant; board member/Preserve Orange County (POC)
Jeff Dickman, member/Historic French Park Association
Pedro Gomez, associated planner, Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency
Minh Thai, executive director, Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency (second half of
meeting)
MEETING NOTES:
Mike McCann began the meeting by saying that other members of the project team would not
be attending the meeting, though he was there to listen. However, he was not expecting
anyone to leave the meeting having achieved their ideal goals. He did not want to delay the
approvals process.
Determining status of the historic 1931 building:
Tim Rush replied that Preserve Orange County would like Toll Brothers to follow up on the
requests made by the Planning Commission at their Sept. 23, 2019 meeting. This would
include investigating what remained of the original 1931 First American title building beneath
the (1966) applied metal siding. To do so, POC recommended Toll Brothers consult with a
qualified historic preservation architect who is experienced in such projects.
Preservation organizations not consulted until late in the process
Tim Rush also recommended Toll Brothers revise the Rincon Historic Resources Study to
address several items it did not include, such as the historic persons who were associated
with the building since 1931. Tim also remarked that the local preservation organizations had
not been asked for their input in the process until recently, too late in the process to have
any meaningful input.
Possible salvage of historic fragments?
Mike McCann stated that in addition to allowing photo documentation of the buildings, Toll
Bros. could also allow for a 90-day on-site salvage and perhaps support the salvage effort with
manpower, tools, trucks, etc. Robert Imboden stated that typically, POC does not engage in
salvage efforts as a means of mitigating demolition. Alison Young of Santa Ana Historical
Preservation Society said, that although there is precedent for their nonprofit to receive
rights to historical salvage, SAHPS did not have the resources to take or store historic
fragments of this building, as Mike McCann had offered to allow preservationists to do. She
also said that she hoped interior elements, such as a stairway, might be considered to be
incorporated into the new project.
Toll Bros. considers moving historic building to out-of-county school campus
Mike McCann said that Toll Bros. had been in conversation with an out-of-county school, which
had expressed interest in taking the historic First American building facade for their campus
to provide a historic character and sense of place.
Preservation could be limited to two facades, not entire structure:
Tim Rush drew a diagram of the property which included the two older buildings that are
currently on the site. He stated that POC understands that complete retention/preservation
of those buildings was most likely not viable within the proposed project. He proposed,
however, that if an investigation shows that the original 1931 building is still in good condition
beneath the applied metal panels, the north and west walls of the First American building
could be incorporated into the new development on the corner of Main and Fifth. While this
not an ideal preservation outcome (the better solution would be to preserve and incorporate
the entire building, plus the neighboring historic structure immediately to the south), Tim
Rush stated that at this point in the process the incorporation of these preserved facades
could be acceptable to POC.
Toll Brothers’ issues re: preservation:
Mike McCann said that he would consider consulting an historic preservation architect. He was
not in favor of a limited demolition to take off part of the metal screening to assess what
remains of the original building underneath though, stating that the building is still owned by
and under the control of First American, not Toll Brothers. He was also not in favor of altering
the currently proposed design, stating that it would be costly, and that the project’s
feasibility is based on a thin profit margin. He also indicated that Toll Bros. would not carry
out the limited demolition, due to the cost of a hazardous materials survey (which could cost
$20,000) and remediation for the entire property.
Hazmat remediation issue:
Mike McCann said he did not want to spend $20,000 for Hazmat investigation before Toll
Brothers takes possession of the building, and until he was certain that the project had been
approved and was going ahead. Alison Young pointed out that the hazmat survey/remediation
would need to be conducted in order to perform the demolition, regardless of whether or not
the facade was preserved. Robert Imboden suggested that Toll Bros. discuss the issue with an
architectural firm that specializes in historic preservation, as they will have experience
conducting such limited demolition work. He felt that there may be an opportunity to
perform the limited demolition without conducting a comprehensive hazardous material
investigation and full remediation of the entire property to simply remove some of the
exterior cladding panels.
Role of First American Title Co.:
When Tim Rush suggested that Toll Brothers ask First American to agree to the investigation of
the structure beneath the screen, Mike McCann suggested that First American may not do so,
as they are not necessarily motived to sell the property. There was a discussion about the
nature of First American’s ongoing role and involvement in the process, beyond that of being
the seller.
Possibility of incorporating historic facades in new structure:
Mike McCann discussed the idea of incorporating the 1931 structure within the new
development, and commented that there would be many implications to be considered, such
as the configuration of underground parking, utilities, and the stacking of the upper floors.
Mike McCann also expressed that the location of the 1931 façade made it unsuitable for
incorporation into the proposed development, as Toll Brothers would like the corner of Main
and Fifth to be used as the leasing office. He also expressed concern that the City’s many
departments each had requirements that would be complicated to renegotiate if the project
was to be redesigned to accommodate the historic structure. Robert Imboden questioned why
the historic façade would necessarily be unsuitable for the leasing office. He suggested that
Toll Bros. look into the 417 Metro Building (Subway Terminal Building - downtown Los
Angeles), and how the historic lobby was very successfully adapted for use as a leasing office
for that mixed-use project. Robert Imboden noted that POC had reviewed work by Mclarand
Vasquez Emsiek (project architects) that incorporated a historic facade into a new high-rise
structure (“Griffin on Spring Street” project in Los Angeles); this could be a suitable model for
this project as well. He went on to clarify that POC could most likely support a project with
floors built above the 1931 structure, if they were minimally set back to provide distinction of
the historic façade. Again, he expressed that a firm which specializes in historic preservation
could provide direction toward preserving the façade, while also achieving as much of the
project program as possible.
Replicating historic facade?
Minh Thai asked if replicating the 1931 facade in new construction and incorporating it would
be acceptable. Robert Imboden replied that it would not generally be accepted as a
commonly accepted “preservation” outcome.
Possible to expedite city approvals?
Jeff Dickman asked Minh Thai if it was possible for his department to expedite approvals for a
limited demolition to avoid more delays to the project if First American and Toll Brothers
agreed to move forward with that. Minh Thai responded that Planning was "here to help.”
Agreed next steps:
In summary, Alan Hess said that the consensus from the meeting discussion, going forward,
would be to
1. Find out what remains of the original building under the applied metal panels;
Mike McCann agreed to:
a.) internally consult about a historic preservation architect in this effort;
b.) discuss this investigation of a limited demolition with First American;
c.) discuss with Mclarand Vasquez Emsiek about the issues and possibilities involved with
redesigning the project to include the historic facade at this point.
2. Revise the Rincon Historic Study to be more complete in terms of historic persons
associated with the structure, and the character of the historic 1931 building. Mike McCann
agreed to
a.) look into this at Toll Brothers
3. Continue discussion on salvage.
Planning Commission Study Session
for the Toll Brothers / First American Title Project
October 14. 2019
submitted by Jeffrey Dickman
1218 N. French Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701
714 240 0883
Dear Ms. Bernal, please accept the following comments concerning the Toll Brothers / First American
Title Company Project. My concerns pertain to the Project's failure to follow key Goals and Polices
contained in the Transit Zoning Code EIR, in its Cultural Resources section. I ask that the City respond
to my comments about how it will require the Applicant to comply with the the adopted guidance
found in City's General Plan, and in its Land Use Element and the Urban Design Elements.
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
City Goal 3 The preservation of existing neighborhoods (pages 4.4 -13 – 4.4-14 of the Transit
Zoning Code)
COMMENT: The project fails to follow Goal 3, because it does not contribute to the
preservation of existing neighborhoods, nor the antique Downtown. Instead the project
introduces out-sized massing with an over-sized scale, which is far and away different from
the original houses and apartments in the surrounding neighborhoods.
REQUEST #1. Direct the Applicant to redesign the project so it preserves the integrity and
character of surrounding neighborhoods, with different massing, a smaller scale, and an
architectural design which supports communities instead of threatening them.
City Policy 3.1 Support development which provides a positive contribution to neighborhood
character and identity.
COMMENT: The project does not contribute to the character or identity of the Downtown.
Instead the project detracts from the Downtown's mostly 2-story, low, and intimate scale.
Most of the antique buildings in the Downtown are taller than wide and share common
walls. The largest of these structures covers the corner of one block, which is unlike the
massive Toll Brothers development project which is planned to cover the entire First
American block.
The Downtown includes an array of historic brick and mortar buildings distinguished with
different facades which include columns, pediments, and other decorative elements,
including a clock tower. These architectural elements are expressed through an array of
diverse architectural styles unique to the Downtown. Instead of incorporating these styles
and elements, the Toll Brothers project brings forward a building that is not even remotely
reflective of any original architectural styles in the Downtown.
REQUEST #2. Direct the Applicant to redesign its project, to reflect the architectural style of
one or more buildings in the Downtown, perhaps the Art Deco style.
City Policy 3.5 Encourage new development and/or additions to existing development that are
compatible in scale, and consistent with the architectural style and character of the
neighborhood.
COMMENT: Toll Brothers project fails to include the existing Orange County Title Company
building as part of its design. Instead the project proposes to demolish that premier historic
structure even though substantial elements of the building are clearly evident at the Main
Street entry, as are interior elements seen from the 5th Street entry. The scale of the existing
First American block is 2 stories. The new project will exceed this height by three times.
REQUEST #3. Direct the Applicant to design the project so it is compatible and consistent
with the scale, and architectural style and character of the original historic Downtown.
City Goal 4. The protection of unique community assets and open space that enhance the
quality of life (page 4.4-14)
COMMENT: Project fails to follow Goal 4, because it does not explicitly protect unique
community assets and open space. Instead the project threatens these unique assets and
open space because it is growth-inducing, and will encourage other over-sized, and out-of-
scale developments to be constructed in and around the surrounding neighborhoods. The
project also fails to mitigate for its negative impact to the unique historical character of the
adjoining neighborhoods, thus degrading these assets.
REQUEST #4. Direct the Applicant to investigate the impacts of its growth-inducing
development on the unique community assets and open space which encircle it, and to
provide for mitigation measures for these negative project impacts
City Policy 4.1 Maintain areas of the City with unique characteristics which contribute
positively to the area in which they are located, such as the Artists Village and historic French
Park.
COMMENT: The Applicant opposes uncovering the metal clad siding which covers the
original Orange County Title building to learn whether the exterior of the structure remains.
If the Applicant demolishes the building, it will fail to maintain any unique characteristics
which contribute to the Downtown per City's adopted policy.
REQUEST #5: Direct the Applicant to expose the west-facing and north-facing elevations of
the Orange County Title Company building so the state of preservation can be assessed.
City Policy 4.2 Encourage the retention and reuse of historical buildings and sites
COMMENT: The Applicant opposes retaining and reusing the highly significant Orange
County Title Company building. Applicant is aware that antique buildings are commonly
reused for permanent and rental housing, business and other uses. Most of the other
antique buildings in the Santa Ana Downtown, are currently in use.
REQUEST #6: Direct the Applicant to allow Toll Brothers the opportunity to explore the
historical integrity of the exterior of the Orange County Title Company building, and to allow
for the reuse of this building as part of the Toll Brothers residential development project.
THE URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT OF THE CITY‘S GENERAL PLAN
City Goal 2.0 Improve the physical appearance of the City through the development that
proportionally and aesthetically related to its district setting (page 4.4.14 Cultural Resources).
COMMENT: The project fails to follow Goal 2.0 because its proportions and aesthetics do not
reflect those in the historic Downtown. Instead the project sets aside the design, scale and
aesthetic of the Downtown and uses its own out-of-scale proportions and aesthetics to
negatively impact the Downtown in a way which will cause irreparable harm.
REQUEST #7: The City must turn down Applicant's project for its violation of its Goal 2.0. City
should direct the Applicant to redesign so it respects Goal 2.0, and the many other Goals and
Policies adopted by the City in its Transit Zoning Code EIR.
City Policy 2.3 Preservation involving the adaptive reuse of historic and architecturally
significant structures, is encouraged Citywide.
COMMENT: The City nor the Applicant support the adaptive reuse of the 1931 Art Deco,
Orange County Title Company building, even though the structure was in constant use as a
business from 1931 until recently.
REQUEST #8: Direct City to work with the Applicant to peel away a portion of the clad siding
from the west and north elevations so the integrity of the Orange County Title Company
building can be assessed. If the antique building exists under the metal cladding, I request
the antique structure be converted, as part of the Toll Brothers project, for use as a project
leasing office.
City Policy 2.4 New projects must respect the architectural style, scale, context, and rhythm of
Santa Ana‘s historic buildings and districts.
COMMENT: Applicant's project does not respect the architectural style, scale and context of
any of the historic buildings in the City, including those in the Downtown, as required by
Policy 2.4
Request #9: City must abide by its adopted policy and direct the applicant to redesign its
glass and metal project to reflect one or more of the existing historical architectural styles in
the Downtown. I request the City work with Downtown businesses, owners and the
preservation community on selecting the new style.
City Policy 2.8 The character and uniqueness of existing districts and neighborhoods are to be
protected from intrusive development.
City Policy 2.11 New developments must re-enforce, or help establish district character.
COMMENT: The First American Title Company/Toll Brothers project does not re-enforce, or
help establish district character. The project fails to follow City's adopted policy because it is
out-of-scale to other historic buildings in the Downtown, fails to adopt a compatible
architectural style found in the Downtown, and proposes to demolish one or more antique
buildings currently on site.
REQUEST #10: Require Applicant work with the affected districts and neighborhoods,
including the Downtown, to insure the project reflects the character of these places.
City Goal 6 Create new and protect existing City landmarks and memorable places that convey
positive images
City Policy 6.2 Development near an existing landmark must be supportive and respectful of
the architecture, site, and other design features of the landmark.
COMMNET: Applicant's project fails to follow City's policy to support or be respectful of the
architecture of other landmark structures in the Downtown, including the Spurgeon Building.
REQUEST #11: Direct the Applicant to work with the community on a design which is both
supportive and respectful of nearby Landmark buildings.
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS (TRANSIT ZONING CODE EIR)
The Transit Zoning Code (SD84A and SD 84B) creates nine distinct zoning categories that are
organized around intensity of building form. This approach to zoning, often referred to as
''form-based'' code, places significant emphasis on the exterior design of new buildings in
order to ensure that they are compatible with the existing context of established
neighborhoods, shopping districts, etc. Because the entire project area has been subject to
intensive development and, subsequently, relatively few large-scale development
opportunities exist, it is important that any new development not weaken the existing fabric of
these long-established areas, particularly those that contain historic resources. (page 4.4-17).
COMMENT: City's Consistency Analysis, as shown above, clearly states that “it is important
that any new development not weaken the existing fabric of these long-established areas,
particularly those that contain historic resources”.
Toll Brothers project, with its out of scale size, weakens the ''fabric'' of the historic character
of the City, especially its antique Downtown. Project scale, massing and incongruous
architectural style undermines the historic character of the Downtown permanently and
irrevocably.
REQUEST #12: The Planning Commission must act to protect the ''fabric'' of City's historical
character and return the project, as it is now designed, to the Applicant, and request that it
work with the community to revise the project to reflect the scale, massing and architecture
of the historic Downtown.
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS (TRANSIT ZONING CODE EIR)
The design and development standards contained within the Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and
SD 84B) contain detailed requirements in regards to building types, frontage types, massing,
height, architecture, accessibility, parking, street presence and landscaping. These standards
are specifically designed to ensure that new development within established neighborhoods,
as well as existing commercial areas, is sensitive to the existing built form of that area. (page
4.4-17)
Figure 4.7-1, Land Use portion of the Transit Zoning Code EIR includes the First American site
as part of the Downtown (DT) zoning. Page 4.4-18 states:
The Transit Zoning Code (SD84A and SD 84B) creates a new zone, the Downtown (DT) Zone for
the area generally contained within the Downtown Santa Ana National Register
District...Specifically, the DT Zone limits building heights based upon the existing historic
context of the buildings currently located in the Historic Downtown. The DT Zone allows for the
addition of residential uses within the existing historic structures, which will contribute to the
long-term economic viability of these buildings, allowing for adaptive re-use and reinvestment
in these historic properties.
COMMENT: The Project fails to ensure that it is sensitive to the existing built-form of the
Downtown. The majority of the built=form is low, 2-story, and intimate. The current historic
building heights along the south side of Fourth Street, and to its east, is only 2 stories. A 4-
story building is west of the site. There is also one 3 story and several four story buildings,
and a single 6-story building nearby, however none of these structures occupies more than a
single corner of one block. The project proposes a 6 to7 story building, covering much more
space than any of the other Downtown buildings, which is significantly different from the
current built condition.
REQUEST 13: Direct the Applicant to redesign its project to include lower height buildings to
be sensitive to the Downtown's dramatically lower scale.
I also wish to also express my deep concern that Staff has not made a thorough presentation to
the Planning Commission regarding City's adopted Goals and Policies, as expressed in the
Transit Zoning Code Environmental Impact Report, and other key City documents.
Because of this, City's Planning Commissioners are uninformed about key, and essential
guidance the Santa Ana City Council has afforded the Downtown, including the First American
Title Company site. Failing to inform and educate the Planning Commission of this information
will insure its members do not have a full and complete picture of the project, and its duties to
require the adopted guidance.
From:timrush@bhhscaprops.com
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Agenda item for this evenings Planning Commission study session, item No 3
Date:Monday, October 14, 2019 11:31:04 AM
Mark McLoughlin
Chairman
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
Sent via email
RE; Your agenda item no. 3 for meeting on 10/14/19
Dear Chair and members of the Planning Commission;
At your last meeting you asked the applicant Toll Bros. & First American Financial to meet with
representatives of the preservation community regarding the above item. The purpose as we
understood it was to organize a plan to explore the status of the buildings and determine IF there
was a structure worthy of saving to integrate into the new development.
We did meet (minutes were distributed to you this morning) and unfortunately there was no
willingness to proceed in any direction. We are disappointed that the developer has taken such a
difficult stance given the opportunity that is before them. We would like to propose that the money
they have set aside in their budget for the building (we are told $300K) as well as funds they would
expend to move the building to a college campus in another county (they revealed this plan at our
meeting at the Planning Department on October 1st, 2019 @1;00pm) likely another $200K would
instead be used to hire a preservation architecture firm to collaborate with their existing architect
MVE to merge the old and new and preserve an important block of our downtown.
The block between 4th and 5th up until the later seventies was a bustling commercial corridor after
First American demolished the historic Montgomery Wards Art Deco building {to create a walled off
parking lot} and the other buildings along that block except for their original home office building
and the brick building immediately to the south. We look forward to this Toll Bros. project adding a
wonderful component to the downtown provided these adjustments are made. We want to
advocate for their project………but it needs to properly fit in with our historic downtown.
I ask that you delay a decision on this project until Toll Bros can do the investigation to properly
determine the best path forward. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Tim Rush
Yost Carlton House
Wilshire Square, 92707-1207