HomeMy WebLinkAbout75E - ONE BROADWAY PLAZA
_°' _r> --~
~
~
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
~. CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
JULY 6, 2004
TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT NO. 1999-01, AMENDMENT
APPLICATION NO. 2004-01, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO.2 0 04 - 0 I, ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT NO. 2004-02, DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 2004-01 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP 2004-02 (COUNTY MAP NO. 2003-262)
FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA OFFICE TOWER
fl.Iha.
CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
~~"" ",,,,",',,
--/'
82.
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
APPROVED
0 As Recommended
0 As Amended
0 Ordinance on 1st Reading
0 Ordinance on 2nd Reading
0 Implementing Resolution
0 Set Public Hearing For
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
Adopt a resolution certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No.
1999-01 and approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program as amended and
Statement of Overriding Considerations.
1.
Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2004-01 for
the One Broadway Specific Development District [Specific Development
No. 75 (SD-75)].
Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-01.
Adopt an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2004-02.
Adopt an ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2004-01.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative
(County Map No. 2003-262) as conditioned.
No.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Parcel
2004-02
Map
On June 14, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City
Council adopt additional mitigation measures in response to comments from
the Santa Ana Unified School District, adopt an ordinance approving
Development Agreement No. 2004-01 and adopt a resolution approving
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-01 by a vote of 6: 1 (Sinclair
opposed) (Exhibit B).
8
75E-1
EIR No. 99-01,
GPA No. 04-01,
DA No. 2004-01
July 6, 2004
Page 2
AA No. 04-01,
ZOA No. 04-02,
and TPM No. 2004-02
DISCUSSION
Analysis of the Issues
On February 23, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for
the various entitlements associated with the One Broadway Office Tower
proposed at 1109 North Broadway (Exhibit A). At this hearing, 33 members
of the public spoke on the proj ect. At the conclusion of the public
hearing, the Commission voted that the City Council certify the Final
Environmental Impact Report No. 1999-01 and approve the Mitigation
Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the
project. Additionally, the Commission recommended that the Council adopt
an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2004-01 and Zoning
Ordinance Amendment No. 2004-02 and adopt a resolution approving General
Plan Amendment No. 2004-01 due to the numerous benefits the project would
bring to the City. However, in addition, the Planning Commission
recommended several amendments for the development. These amendments
included the addition of five mitigation measures, the amendment of one
mitigation measure, and changes to the Specific Development. The changes
recommended by the Planning Commission were:
2 .
4.
1.
The traffic barriers
become permanent;
currently located within French Park shall
Westbound traffic on Washington Avenue must be diverted either north
or south at Main Street;
3.
Eastbound traffic on Tenth Street must be diverted either north and
south at Main Street;
The historic structure located
to a City approved site and be
and utility service;
at 1015 North Broadway be relocated
provided with a permanent foundation
5.
The historic structure located at 1109 North Broadway be relocated
to a vacant lot in the City and be rehabilitated, including
construction of a permanent foundation and utility service;
6.
Amend Mitigation Measure No. T-1 to limit the start of construction
on Saturdays to 8 a.m.;
75E-2
8EIR No. 99-01,
GPA No. 04-01,
DA No. 2004-01
July 6, 2004
Page 3
AA No. 04-01,
ZOA No. 04-02,
and TPM No. 2004-02
7.
Modify Item 4 of the Permitted Uses section of the Specific
Development No. 75 document to state "cafes and restaurants, except
fast food and/or take-out restaurants;" and,
8.
Add Item 7 of the Conditionally
Specific Development No. 75 document
out restaurants."
Permitted Uses section of the
to state "fast food and/or take-
On March 15, 2004, the City Council held a public hearing for the One
Broadway development. After receiving public testimony on the project and
a discussion by the City Council, formal action on the various
entitlements under consideration was continued for 60 days. During this
interim period, staff met with a newly created Council Ad Hoc Committee,
which assisted in preparing the terms and conditions for the development
agreement. Also, the Council identified specific issues and standards the
development agreement should address including construction costs,
preservation of historic structures, traffic mitigation measures, and
8benchmarks for issuance of building permits.
Since the March 15, 2004 public hearing, staff has met on numerous
occasions with the Ad Hoc Committee and the applicant. As a result of
these meetings and extensive negotiations, a development agreement has
been prepared (Exhibit B-1). This agreement has incorporated the major
issues raised by the City Council at the March City Council hearing as
well as those issues raised by the Ad Hoc Committee. These issues
include:
8
1.
Prohibiting the issuance of any building permit for the Project
until the Developer provides evidence of binding commitments for
lease of not less than 50 percent of the net leasable area in the
Project from tenants who would qualify as "Investment Grade Tenants"
(BBB-or greater) as rated by either Standard & Poor's or Moody's
rating agencies. Non-rated publicly held, or private companies with
a rating of BB or BB+ may meet this requirement by providing a
"Shadow Rating" from either agency depicting a minimum of a neutral
credit outlook. Law firms shall provide evidence of a rating of
"AV" from Matindale-Hubbell or equivalent rating agency. Binding
commitments to lease shall be in a form and content normally
accepted by conventional lending institutions and subject to the
review and approval of the City's Executive Director of Planning and
Building which shall not be unreasonably withheld;
75E-3
EIR No. 99-01,
GPA No. 04-01,
DA No. 2004-01
July 6, 2004
Page 4
2.
3.
4.
AA No. 04-01,
ZOA No. 04-02,
and TPM No. 2004-02
Requiring the developer to submit evidence, for the provision of the
payment of "Prevailing" and/or "Area Standard Wages" as appropriate,
that it has entered into a labor agreement with the Los Angeles and
Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council. Said
agreement shall also include provisions that encourage the referral
and utilization, to the extent permitted by law, of qualified
residents as journeymen, apprentices and trainees. An executed copy
of the agreement shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance
of building permits;
Prohibiting the developer to request or accept any agreement with the
Santa Ana Community Redevelopment Agency for economic, debt service
payments, or other assistance for the development of the Project;
A provision that all offsite mitigation measures identified in the
entitlements shall be specifically listed and incorporated into the
Agreement (the "Project Mitigation Measures"). Developer shall
deposit cash, security in a form acceptable to the City's Executive
Director of Public Works Agency, or other reasonably acceptable proof
of ability to perform to pay for the Project Mitigation Measures
(including traffic studies) at the time called for in the
entitlement, and in any event, prior to the issuance of building
permits. Any deposit shall be supplemented to cover the actual costs
incurred. The Public Works Agency shall provide to the Developer an
estimate of the Project Mitigation Measures which shall include land
acquisition and construction costs pertaining to the public
improvements required of the Project;
5.
Defining and requiring core construction costs of the Project shall
not be less than the RS Means "Medium" square footage estimate,
including the installation cost of all mechanical and electrical
equipment for a Class A high rise office building;
6.
Requiring the drop off/pick up area for Orange County High School of
the Arts (OCHSA) be approved by the City Engineer and implemented
before any demolition or construction is initiated for the Project;
7.
Relocating the historic structure located at 1015 North Broadway
(Twist-Basler House) to Cabrillo Park at the sole expense of the
Developer. Additionally, the structure shall be set upon a new
foundation, supplied with all necessary utilities and shall be
rehabilitated to City standards. The cost of rehabilitation shall
serve as a credit against the Developer's Art and Culture fee
obligation; and
75E-4
8EIR No. 99-01,
GPA No. 04-01,
DA No. 2004-01
July 6, 2004
Page 5
8
AA No. 04-01,
ZOA No. 04-02,
and TPM No. 2004-02
8.
Retaining the structure at 1109 N. Broadway (Koenig House)
current location. The Developer shall be responsible for
rehabilitation of the structure per City standards.
Retaining and rehabilitating the Koenig House at its current
location will enhance historic preservation and strengthen the
streetscape character of Broadway. In order to maintain the Koenig
House on-site, egress from the parking structure onto Broadway has
been modified to reduce the two egress lanes to a single lane with
right-turn restrictions, which will include the construction of a
landscaped median in Broadway. This will also allow the elimination
of the previously proposed traffic signal. Staff from the Public
Works Agency has evaluated the effects of these circulation changes,
including an analysis of the levels of service of affected
intersections, and found that they will result in no new significant
traffic impacts. In fact, retaining the Koenig House will lessen
the proj ect I s environmental effects by preserving, rehabilitating
and re-using a significant historic resource.
its
the
The Mitigation Monitoring Program has been revised to reflect these
changes. More specifically: Traffic Measure No. 18 (T-18) has been
revised to eliminate the traffic signal and require a landscaped
median in Broadway to prevent left turns; and, Cultural Resources
Measures Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 9 (CR-l, CR-2, CR-4 and CR-9) have been
revised to reflect the change requiring the Koenig House to be
retained at its present location and to be rehabilitated by the
applicant.
The development agreement addresses the issues raised by the City Council
at their March meeting. The tentative parcel map, which merges several
existing lots on the project site, is in compliance with all applicable
State and local regulations. The Final Environmental Impact Report,
Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Consideration for One Broadway Plaza has been revised to address the
inclusion of a Development Agreement, the addition of mitigation measures
to reduce impacts to historical resources and pedestrian safety, the
construction of a student drop off for Orange County High School of the
Arts and modifications to the egress of the project parking structure.
Attached are the revisions to the Final Environmental Impact Report,
Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Consideration.
8
75E-5
EIR No. 99-01,
GPA No. 04-01,
DA No. 2004-01
July 6, 2004
Page 6
AA No. 04-01,
ZOA No. 04-02,
and TPM No. 2004-02
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
s&! z6it~g
Executive Director
Planning & Building
Agency
VF\VC:rb
vf\reports\shorteir99-01&aa&gpa04-01&ZOa04-02da04-01tpm04-02.07-06-04.cc
75E-6
8
8
8
KO- 06/30/04
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-020
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA CERTIFYING AND APPROVING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, APPROVING A
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND ADOPTING
CERTAIN FACTS, FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT ONE BROADWAY PLAZA
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A. Applicant is requesting approval of various entitlements in order to construct
a thirty-seven (37) story, 493 feet in height, office tower located at One
Broadway.
On February 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Certify and adopt the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01,
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
B.
C.
Adopt an ordinance approving the rezoning the property located at
One Broadway Plaza from Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) to
One Broadway Specific Development District (SD-75), Amendment
Application No. 2004-01.
Adopt an ordinance amending to the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-3)
(ZOA No. 2004-02).
Adopt a resolution amending the General Plan of the City of Santa
Ana to increase the Floor Area Ratio to 2.9, to classify streets as
Local Commercial Streets, and to modify the Urban Design Element
(GPA No. 2004-01).
The City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing
on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway on March 15, 2004, and at that
time considered all testimony, written and oral. After closing this hearing, the
City Council directed that a Development Agreement be negotiated.
On June 14, 2004, the Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
2.
3.
4.
D.
75E-7
Resolution No. 2004-020
Page 1 of 5
E.
F.
1.
Adopt additional mitigation measures in response to comments from
the Santa Ana Unified School District.
Adopt and ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2004-
01.
2.
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02
(County Map No. 2003-262) as conditioned.
On July 6, 2004, the City Council held a second duly noticed public hearing
on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway, and at that time considered all
testimony, written and oral.
Due to the size of the project and the impacts to the environment, an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project.
1. For over three years, the City has considered a project to build a
thirty-seven (37) story office building consisting of 518,003 square
feet of office area, 8,525 square feet of retail area, 18,596 square
feet of restaurant area and an eight (8) level parking structure on
Broadway.
On October 7, 1999, a Notice of Preparation was prepared,
submitted to interested persons, responsible and trustee agencies,
and filed with the County Recorder regarding this proposed project,
which was at that time described as a 44 story office building with
an adjacent parking structure. These structures would be built on a
site which is currently developed with a number of homes which
have been converted to a variety of older office/business uses, a
shoe repair shop, and an apartment building. Most of these uses
would have to be removed to make way for project improvements.
a. On February 12, 2001, a Recirculation of Notice of
Preparation was prepared, submitted to interested persons,
responsible and trustee agencies, and filed with the County
Recorder regarding this proposed project, which was at that
time described abandonment and closing of a segment of
Sycamore Street between Washington Street and 10th Street
to allow for construction of the proposed 8-level parking
structure, a reduction in the height of the office building from
44 stories to 38 stories, and the inclusion of helipad on the
roof of the office building.
A significant number of community meetings, public meetings and
public hearings have been subsequently held to consider this
proposed project. As a result of these community meetings and
public comments three (3) alternatives to the proposed project were
developed and various impacts were identified to be studied.
As a result of this input, the City prepared a Draft EIR for this
proposed project, which was submitted for public comment to all
responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse, neighboring
3.
2.
3.
4.
Resolution No. 2004-020
Page 2 of 5
75E-8
communities and districts, neighborhoods in the vicinity and the
requesting public.
All comments to the Draft EIR were considered and responded to in
the proposed Final EIR (which includes the Draft EIR and errata).
A proposed mitigation monitoring plan has been prepared, as has
50 pages of certain facts, findings and statements, which are
attached to this Resolution.
At its regular meeting of February 23, 2003, the Planning
Commission of the City of Santa Ana, following a duly noticed
public hearing, voted by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) to
recommend to the City Council that it adopt this Final EIR, the
mitigation monitoring plan, and certain facts, findings and
statements.
The City Council has fully considered this matter, and all public
testimony, at a duly noticed public hearing held at its regularly
scheduled meeting of March 15, 2004 and the second duly noticed
public hearing held at its regularly scheduled meeting of July 6,
2004.
All attached documents, including the Final EIR, the mitigation monitoring
plan, the 50 pages of findings and approvals, the Request for Council
Action, and the record of proceedings are incorporated herein by this
reference as though fully set forth. At the July 6, 2004 meeting, the City
Council also adopted an ordinance amending the Midtown Specific Plan
(lOA No. 2004-02) and rezoning the property (M No. 2004-01), a
resolution amending the City's general plan (GPA No. 2004-01), and a
resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02. This resolution
incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein, the ordinance and
resolutions and said Final Environmental Impact Report, Mitigation
Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and all of
their respective facts, findings and conclusions in support of this resolution
and the findings made herein.
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final EIR prepared with respect to this Project. The City Council has,
as a result of its consideration of the record as a whole and the evidence presented at
the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Final EIR
meets all requirement of CEQA, including but limited to: finding that the Final EIR
adequately addresses the impacts of the project; that it identifies and through the
mitigation monitoring plan imposes all feasible mitigation measures which will reduce all
of the significant environmental impacts of the Project to a level of insignificance, except
those unavoidable impacts described more specifically in the statement of overriding
considerations; discusses a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project; identifies
the environmentally superior alternative; and based upon all of which and the record as
a whole the Council chooses to approve the Project. The City Council hereby certifies
8
G.
8
8
5.
6.
7.
8.
75E-9
Resolution No. 2004-020
Page 3 of 5
and approves the Final EIR, the mitigation monitoring plan, the facts, findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations attached to this Resolution as Exhibits "A" and
"B" respectively and incorporated herein by this reference, and directs that a Notice of
Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in
the manner required by law.
Section 3. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCR")
§ 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a
whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources
depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved
concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish
and Game Code § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 735.5, the payment of Fish and Game
Department filing fees is not required in conjunction with this project.
ADOPTED this - day of
,2004.
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher
City Attomey
By:
Kylee Otto
Deputy City Attorney
AYES:
Councilmembers
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
Council members
NOT PRESENT:
Councilmembers
Resolution No. 2004-020
Page 4 of 5
75E-10
8
8
8
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2004-020 to be the original Resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was
published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana.
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75E-11
Resolution No. 2004-020
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
REFER TO TAB "M" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 12 - MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM
75E-12
8
EXHIBIT B
8
REFER TO TAB "N" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 13 - EIR FINDINGS
AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
FINDINGS
8
75E-13
ORDINANCE NO. NS-2649
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
ONE BROADWAY PLAZA FROM MIDTOWN SPECIFIC
PLAN NO.3 (SP-3) TO ONE BROADWAY SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SD-75) (M NO. 2004-01);
AMENDING THE MIDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (ZOA NO.
2004-02) AND ADOPTING THE ONE BROADWAY
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SD-75)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby find, determine
and declare as follows:
B.
Applicant is requesting approval of various entitlements in order to construct
a thirty-seven (37) story, 493 feet in height, office tower located at One
Broadway.
On February 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Certify and adopt the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01,
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
A.
2.
D.
Adopt an ordinance approving the rezoning the property located at
One Broadway Plaza from Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) to
One Broadway Specific Development District (SD-75), Amendment
Application No. 2004-01.
Adopt an ordinance amending to the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-3)
(ZOA No. 2004-02).
Adopt a resolution amending the General Plan of the City of Santa
Ana to increase the Floor Area Ratio to 2.9, to classify streets as
Local Commercial Streets, and to modify the Urban Design Element
(GPA No. 2004-01).
The City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing
on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway on March 15, 2004, and at that
time considered all testimony, written and oral. After closing this hearing, the
City Council directed that a Development Agreement be negotiated.
On June 14, 2004, the Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
3.
4.
C.
75E-14
8
8
8
E.
Adopt additional mitigation measures in response to comments from
the Santa Ana Unified School District.
Adopt and ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2004-
01.
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02
(County Map No. 2003-262) as conditioned.
On July 6, 2004, the City Council held a second duly noticed public hearing
on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway, and at that time considered all
testimony, written and oral.
Amendment Application No. 2004-01 has been filed with the City of Santa
Ana to change the zoning district designation of certain real property located
at One Broadway from Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) to the One
Broadway Specific Development District (SD-75).
1. SD-75 would allow professional and business offices; banks and
similar financial institutions; service and commercial retail uses;
restaurants; nightclubs, bars and indoor entertainment (with a
Conditional Use Permit); coffee houses (with a Conditional Use
Permit); and banquet facilities (with a Conditional Use Permit).
Amendment Application No. 2004-01 is consistent with the General
Plan, including but not limited to its goals and policies to:
a. Promote the balance of land uses to address basic community
needs. Land Use Element Goal No. 1.0.
1.
2.
3.
F.
2.
b.
Promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and
fiscal viability. land Use Element Goal No. 2.0.
Support developments that create a business environment
that is safe and attractive. land Use Element Policy No. 2.8.
Enhance development sites and districts which are unique
community assets that enhance the quality of life. Land Use
Element Goal No. 4.0.
Encourage high intensity office development to attract major
tenants that will contribute to cultural and business activities of
the central city. Land Use Policy No. 1.3.
Support projects that contribute to the redevelopment and
revitalization of the central city urban areas. Land Use Policy
No. 2.7.
Create an opportunity for Class A office space suitable for
acquisition of major, high profile tenant in the Downtown
Development Area. Land Use Policy No. 2.11.
Encourage large-scale office development with ancillary retail
in the proximity of the Civic Center Complex, Downtown and
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
75E-15
3.
Midtown urban areas. Land Use Policy No. 2.12.
The City Council has weighed and balanced the general plan's
policies and has determined that based upon this balancing that the
One Broadway project is consistent with the purpose of the general
plan.
The Council has examined all of the goals and policies of the general
plan, including:
a. Promote the balance of land uses to address basic community
needs. Land Use Element Goal 1.0.
4.
G.
Promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and
fiscal viability. Land Use Element Goal 2.0.
Support developments that create a business environment
that is safe and attractive. Land Use Element Policy 2.8.
Enhance development sites and districts which are unique
community assets that enhance the quality of life. Land Use
Element goal 4.0.
Encourage high intensity office development to attract major
tenants that will contribute to cultural and business activities of
the central city. Land Use Policy No. 1.3.
Support projects that contribute to the redevelopment and
revitalization of the central city urban areas. Land Use Policy
No. 2.7.
Create Class A office space suitable for acquisition of major,
high profile tenant in the Downtown Development Area. Land
Use Policy No. 2.11.
Encourage large-scale office development with ancillary retail
in the proximity of the Civic Center Complex, Downtown and
Midtown urban areas. Land Use Policy No. 2.12.
The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the
Request for Council Action dated March 15, 2004 and July 6, 2004
accompanying this matter.
For these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No.
2004-01 is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the
General Plan of the City of Santa Ana and otherwise justified by the
public necessity, convenience, and general welfare.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2004-02 has been filed with the City of
Santa Ana to amend the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-3) to eliminate the area
of the One Broadway Specific Design District from SP-3.
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01, the Mitigation Monitoring
Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which came
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
5.
6.
H.
75E-16
8
8
8
before the City Council on March 15, 2004 and was approved and adopted
by resolution at the second duly noticed public held on July 6, 2004. At the
July 6, 2004 meeting, the City Council also adopted an ordinance rezoning
the property (M No. 2004-01), a resolution amending the City's general
plan (GPA No. 2004-01) and a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No.
2004-02. This ordinance incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth
herein, the resolutions and said Final Environmental Impact Report,
Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and all of their respective findings and conclusions in support of this
ordinance.
Section 2. The real property located at One Broadway is hereby reclassified
from Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) to One Broadway Specific Development
District (SD-75). Amended Sectional District Map number 12-5-10, showing the above
described change in use district designation, is hereby approved and attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. (M No.
2004-01 ).
Section 3. Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) is hereby amended as set forth
in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein. (lOA
2004-02).
Section 4. One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District (SD-75) as set
forth in Exhibit "C", attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein, is
approved adopted in its entirety.
Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that
it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
ADOPTED this - day of
,2004.
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
75E-17
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher
City Attorney
By:
Benjamin Kaufman
Chief Assistant City Attorney
AYES:
Councilmembers
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT:
Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Ordinance No. NS-2649 to be the original ordinance adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was
published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana.
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75E-18
SEVENTEENTH
I I----..J L--J I
.
""--'--'-'- ---
ST.
r.~'o
I '-----.JL.J LS.H
+
I C5 I C1 II C1 I C5 ¡ 5P-3 !BB~[."
\ G ,I. 'SP-3 SP-3 '..
R3- R3- ~ R3- . J:Lilllu : [
I!,~t. .:1. t HDII liOU HOII. .:13- P;J. 1. $1' :
'8 ."'*011 -011 ~J" .3
., t:_Jl.ææ :1; ~ " ~l: 8B["
s!"¡:' :;.' .,¡J I] ru [J2 ~~: ::2 Sf ~ 0 [
J! ~i R' R1, R1, , lJ lJ CO l:J~ UG" R2 lJ :[
J~ ---',," .:."' ~IDd~"' '" ". ¡
r ". 00 . ~¡ ~J:~ ~~{
J¡~;:: R~ ŒJ\ ..~...- /"::. I~[.
~J~EB., ,..,~ 1.,'0r 0 ~ _I!:~~!¡~
III ] Er R2 IŒJ: P I~ SO-55 ~ -~, ,I C3~"11 C3-' I [
i P ~ P ~ I S" 0 Ç:;l~3-A [
~ 50-13 50-2 ~ D-39 C3A ~ L:::J
1:11 : 1 ... . . , .~: . +'I"~ ..
--~-_...__..-. +
I!nfl 1111 n.S-Iol r;ï.S..9
ST.
SP-1
C1 i C1 ~
- ,
2-S-!2J I !'~.'O
+
~ ~
,r
.
"'
ill ~ C1 :
15,.1. L_2fi'
¡~ Cl
!~
II-S-IO
R1
R1 '6'"
R1
R1
R,
~
rJ)
II
FIRST
II
II
.11
II
Zoning Dist..i<:t ADOPTED BY RESOlUTION NO, 5186 BY THE SANTA ANA PlANNING CQMM!SIQN
PAAT OF OROINANCE NO. NS.394 ADOPTED BY THE SANTA mA CITY COUNCIL. AuGUST 17. 1959.
AI GENERAL AGArCUlTUAE CS ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL PRO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVElOPMEI'fT
-a PARKING MODIFICATION CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL RI SINGLE: FAMilY RESIDENTIAL
C-SM COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN GC GOVERNMENT CENTER R' LIMITED MULTIPL.E FAMILY RES.
CI COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MI lIGHT INDUSTRIAl R3 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE
Ct.MQ COMM. COMMERCJAI./MUSEUM DISTRICT M' HEAVY INDUSTRIAL FAMILY RESIDENT!AL
C2 GENERAl COMMERCIAL MQ MIUTARY OPERATIONS R' SUBURBAN APARTMENTS
C3 CENTRAl BUSINESS Q OPEN SPACE RE REAl. ESTATE
C3-A CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE P PROFESSIONAL SO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SP SPECIFIC PlAN
SCALE IN FEET
I
,~
"'"
-8000
MINIMUM Fr:¡C)NT..I.Ge
MINIMUM I.OT ...".eA
Lal,",,' Awhion Oal8. 2-20..04
n+1St.u..PISn.EOmctAlSECTIONAl
OISTI>;IC'I'WPOf'n+ECrrYOFSNfTA»IA.
ASAIJT1.IORtZEOBVClT'fCOlJ~1l
RESOlUTlONi'IO,T"'It.3,CØEOII.I.T..I
IiEAEBYAT1'!STtI't.-J"1'I<I$lAAPISATiI\}E .
COPVOFn+tOAtGIfIAlSECTION.o.&.OISTRCT
MAPNO.,;t-s.IØ,
.... ~S1,,~""'-'
ClEPVTYCrrY!oWIoIúERFQ'I
œvE~OAEM' $[lMCEj
C"!IAw..DeIl
SEP"T'EMB£I'I'C 1962
Rf$.IA.A.IANX.NO .l.Å105e þ..þ..10!I8 oI..,,ge,1 þ......w.~ A.", 0.<.2
CH:Q./I\U.NO. Ns.211T "''''' 1IIS.~ð1 NS.2:J01 1IIS.2351
~Dc...Te .21.92 T.I." ""~M 12.l-" .1~'HI
-swV€o .;4, .;4, .;4, .;4, .;4,
RS:!'.IA.AINlX.NO
~,I"f$"'O
.tLXIPtEDD.l.TE
.-;PF>ROVEC
~..
SECTIONAL
DISTRICT
MAP
.
I
2-5-102
PREPARED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION
CITY OF SANTA ANA CALIFORNIA
-....
@
Exhibit "A"
EXHIBIT B
REFER TO TAB "S" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 18 - MIDTOWN
SPECIFIC PLAN
75E-20
8
EXHIBIT C
8
REFER TO TAB "T" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 19 - SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 75
8
75E-21
KO- 06/30104
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-021
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE
CITY OF SANTA ANA TO INCREASE THE FLOOR AREA
RATIO OF THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA DISTRICT
CENTER TO 2.9, TO CLASSIFY STREETS AS LOCAL
COMMERCIAL STREETS, TO MODIFY THE URBAN
DESIGN ELEMENT TO INCORPORATE ONE BROADWAY
(GPA NO. 2004-01) AND TO REPEAL RESOLUTION NO.
2000-059
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
B.
Applicant is requesting approval of various entitlements in order to
construct a thirty-seven (37) story, 493 feet in height, office tower located
at One Broadway.
On February 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to
recommend that the City Council:
1. Certify and adopt the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01,
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
A.
4.
Adopt an ordinance approving the rezoning the property located at
One Broadway Plaza from Midtown Specific Plan NO.3 (SP-3) to
One Broadway Specific Development District (SD-75), Amendment
Application No. 2004-01.
Adopt an ordinance amending to the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-3)
(lOA NO. 2004-02)
Adopt an resolution amending the General Plan of the City of Santa
Ana to increase the Floor Area Ratio of One Broadway Plaza
District Center to 2.9, to classify streets as Local Commercial
Streets, and to modify the Urban Design Element (GPA No. 2004-
01)
The City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public
hearing on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway on March 15, 2004,
2.
3.
C.
75E-22
Resolution No. 2004-021
Page 1 of 5
8
D.
E.
8
8
F.
and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral. After closing
this hearing, the City Council directed that a Development Agreement be
negotiated.
On June 14,2004, the Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Adopt additional mitigation measures in response to comments
from the Santa Ana Unified School District.
Adopt and ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2004-
01.
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02
(County Map No. 2003-262) as conditioned.
On July 6, 2004, the City Council held a second duly noticed public
hearing on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway, and at that time
considered all testimony, written and oral.
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-01 has been filed with the City of
Santa Ana to:
1. Modify the Land Use Element as follows:
a. Creation of the One Broadway Plaza District Center.
b. To increase the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the property
located at One Broadway to 2.9 (the FAR for One Broadway
Plaza District Center).
Revise and update the policies to accommodate large-scale
office development.
Revise the boundaries of the Midtown Specific Plan.
Revise the Key Areas in the City of Santa Ana and the
corresponding Floor Area Ratios. (Table A-2)
Identify One Broadway Plaza District Center as a Major
Development Area.
Modify the Circulation Element to create a Local Commercial street
classification and standards.
Modify the Urban Design Element to incorporate One Broadway
Plaza.
The Council finds that General Plan Amendment No. 2004-01 is consistent
with the General Plan, including but not limited to its policies and goals of:
1. Promote the balance of land uses to address basic community
needs. Land Use Element Goal 1.0
Promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and fiscal
viability. Land Use Element Goal 2.0
2.
3.
c.
d.
e.
f.
2.
3.
G.
2.
75E-23
Resolution No. 2004-021
Page 2 of 5
H.
Support developments that create a business environment that is
safe and attractive. Land Use Element Policy 2.8
Enhance development sites and districts which are unique
community assets that enhance the quality of life. Land Use
Element goal 4.0
Encourage high intensity office development to attract major
tenants that will contribute to cultural and business activities of the
central city. Land Use Policy No. 1.3
Support projects that contribute to the redevelopment and
revitalization of the central city urban areas. Land Use Policy No.
2.7
Create Class A office space suitable for acquisition of major, high
profile tenant in the Downtown Development Area. Land Use
Policy No. 2.11
Encourage large-scale office development with ancillary retail in the
proximity of the Civic Center Complex, Downtown and Midtown
urban areas. Land Use Policy No. 2.12
The Council finds that the City's general plan is designed, as it must be, to
accommodate a wide range of competing interests - including those of
developers, neighborhoods and homeowners, prospective homebuyers,
environmentalists, current and prospective business owners, jobseekers,
taxpayers, and providers and recipients of all types of city-provided
services - and to present a clear and comprehensive set of principles to
guide development decisions. The City's general plan sets forth these
guiding principles. Once in place, it is the province of this Council to
examine the specifics of a proposed project to determine whether it would
be in harmony with the policies stated in the general plan.
The City Council has weighed and balanced the general plan's policies,
both new and old, and has determined that based upon this balancing that
the One Broadway project is consistent with the purpose of the general
plan.
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01, the Mitigation Monitoring
Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which came
before the City Council on March 15, 2004, and was approved and
adopted by resolution at the July 6, 2004 hearing. At the July 6, 2004
meeting, the City Council also adopted an ordinance amending the
Midtown Specific Plan (ZOA No. 2004-02) and rezoning the property (M
No. 2004-01), a resolution amending the City's general plan (GPA No.
2004-01), and a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02.
This resolution incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein,
the ordinance and resolutions and said Final Environmental Impact
Report, Mitigation Monitoring Program. and Statement of Overriding
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
I.
J.
75E-24
Resolution No. 2004-021
Page 3 of 5
8
8
8
Considerations, and all of their respective facts, findings and conclusions
in support of this resolution and the findings made herein.
Section 2. The City Council hereby, approves General Plan Amendment No.
2004-01. The pages changed in the Land Use Element (Exhibit A), the Circulation
Element (Exhibit B), and the Urban Design Element (Exhibit C) are attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
Section 3. These General Plan amendments are expressly conditioned upon
adoption by the City Council of Ordinance No. NS-2649. These changes shall not vest
until the effective date of such ordinance. Should no such zoning ordinance
amendment become effective, then these General Plan amendments are null and void
and of no effect.
Section 4. The City Council hereby repeals in its entirety Resolution No. 2000-
059 entitled "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Santa Ana closing to
vehicular traffic that portion of Tenth Street between Main Street and Sycamore Street,"
which repeal shall only become effective upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to
One Broadway Plaza.
Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately after its adoption by
the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting
this Resolution.
ADOPTED this - day of
,2004.
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney
By:
Kylee Otto
Deputy City Attorney
75E-25
Resolution No. 2004-021
Page 4 of 5
AYES:
Councilmembers
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT:
Council members
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2003-021 to be the original resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75E-26
Resolution No. 2004-021
Page 5 of 5
8
EXHIBIT A
8
REFER TO TAB "0" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 14 - LAND USE
ELEMENT
8
75E-27
EXHIBIT B
REFER TO TAB "Q" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 16 - CIRCULATION
ELEMENT
75E-28
8
EXHIBIT C
8
REFER TO TAB "R" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 17 - URBAN DESIGN
ELEMENT
8
75E-29
ORDINANCE NO. NS -2656
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AND ONE
BROADWAY PLAZA, LLC, 1200 N. MAIN, LLC, AND 845
BROADWAY, LLC
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
A. The City is authorized pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864
through 65869.5 to enter into development agreements with persons having legal or
equitable interests in real property for the purpose of establishing certainty for both City
and owner in the development process.
B. The City enters into this Development Agreement pursuant to the
provisions of the Government Code and applicable City policies.
C. The Planning Commission has, following a duly noticed public hearing, on
June 14, 2004 recommended approval of this Development Agreement.
E. Entering into this Development Agreement would provide the City with
extraordinary and significant benefits that are of regional significance, relate to existing
deficiencies in public facilities, require the owner of One Broadway Plaza to contribute a
greater percentage of benefits than would otherwise be required, and represent
benefits which would not otherwise be required as part of the development process.
F. The City Council has held a noticed public hearing on this Ordinance, and
has considered all testimony presented thereto.
G. The City Council has, on July 6, 2004, approved a Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) in conjunction with this Project and adopted a mitigation monitoring plan,
written findings and a statement of overriding considerations and the Council adopts this
ordinance based upon said EIR, plan, findings and statement of overriding
considerations.
SECTION 7: Development Agreement, a true and correct copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit 1, is hereby approved, and the City Manager and Clerk of the
Council are authorized to execute it on behalf of the City. The Clerk of the City is hereby
Ordinance NO. NS-2656
Page 1
75E-30
8
8
8
authorized and directed to cause this Development Agreement to be recorded with the
County Recorder's Office.
SECTION 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that
it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
ADOPTED this
day of
,2004
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney
By:
Benjamin Kaufman
Chief Assistant City Attorney
AYES:
Council members
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers
Ordinance No. NS-
Page 2
75E-31
NOT PRESENT:
Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the
attached Ordinance No. NS=2.6.5fi to be the original ordinance adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was
published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana.
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
ordinance No. NS-2656
Page 3
75E-32
8
EXHIBIT A
8
REFER TO TAB "V" IN BINDER-
EXHIBIT 81 - DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
8
75E.33
KO-06/30/04
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-052
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
2004-02 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT ONE
BROADWAY (COUNTY MAP NO. 2003-262)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A.
B.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02 for the property located at One
Broadway came before the City Council of the City of Santa Ana for a
public hearing on July 6, 2004.
Applicant filed Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02, seeking to merge 12
parcels into one lot.
On February 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to
recommend that the City Council:
1. Certify and adopt the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01,
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
C.
D.
Adopt an ordinance approving the rezoning the property located at
One Broadway Plaza from Midtown Specific Plan No.3 (SP-3) to
One Broadway Specific Development District (SD-75), Amendment
Application No. 2004-01.
Adopt an ordinance amending to the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-3)
(ZOA No. 2004-02).
Adopt a resolution amending the General Plan of the City of Santa
Ana to increase the Floor Area Ratio to 2.9, to classify streets as
Local Commercial Streets, and to modify the Urban Design
Element (GPA No. 2004-01).
The City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public
hearing on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway on March 15, 2004,
and at that time considered all testimony, written and oral. After closing
this hearing, the City Council directed that a Development Agreement be
negotiated.
2.
3.
4.
75E-34
Resolution No. 2004-052
Page 1 of 4
8
E.
8
8
F.
On June 14, 2004, the Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public
hearing, and by a vote of 6:1 (Sinclair opposed) voted to recommend that
the City Council:
1. Adopt additional mitigation measures in response to comments
from the Santa Ana Unified School District.
Adopt and ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 2004-
01.
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02
(County Map No. 2003-262) as conditioned.
On July 6, 2004, the City Council held a second duly noticed public
hearing on the abovesaid actions for One Broadway, and at that time
considered all testimony, written and oral.
The City Council of the City of Santa Ana determines that the following
findings have been established:
1. The proposed project, as conditioned, and its design and
improvements are consistent with the General Commercial (GC)
designation of the General Plan and are otherwise consistent with all
other elements of the General Plan.
2.
3.
G.
2.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 2003-
262) will have no adverse affect on the land uses as
prescribed by the General Plan. The project will delete
existing property lines and will be in compliance with the
amended General Plan land use designation for the site.
The proposed project, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable
requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes as well as other
applicable City ordinances.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02 is in keeping with the
provisions of Site Plan Review, Chapters 34 and 41 of the
Santa Ana Municipal Code and the proposed provisions of
Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75). These provisions
pertain to the subdivision of land and development standards
for the site.
The project site is physically suitable for the type and density of the
proposed project.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02 will not create a condition
that makes the subdivision physically unsuitable for the site.
This map is for lot consolidation purposes only and will
facilitate the construction of a 37 -story office tower on the
site.
3.
75E-35
Resolution No. 2004-052
Page 2 of 4
The design and improvements of the proposed project will not
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
The parcel map will not cause any environmental damage
nor injure fish or wildlife as the site is currently occupied by
commercial structures. In addition, no fish or wildlife was
identified as residing on the project site during the
environmental review of this project.
The design or improvements of the proposed project will not cause
serious public health problems.
No alterations are proposed to the development project that
will lead to serious damage or create public health problems.
Environmental Impact Report No. 1999-01 has been
prepared for this site which analyzes the environmental
impacts of the map. As a result, approval of the tentative
parcel map will not affect the health or safety of persons
residing in the vicinity.
The design or improvements of the proposed project will not conflict
with the easements acquired by the public at large for access
through or use of property within the proposed project.
Approval of the tentative parcel map will not create any
conflicts with existing easements found on the site. As a
condition of approval of the parcel map, conditions, covenants
and restrictions (CC&Rs) will need to be submitted for this
project. These CC&Rs will ensure that access, egress, and
other necessary easements are maintained over the two
parcels.
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 99-01, the Mitigation Monitoring
Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which came
before the City Council on March 15,2004, and was approved and
adopted by resolution at the July 6, 2004 hearing. At the July 6, 2004
meeting, the City Council also adopted an ordinance amending the
Midtown Specific Plan (lOA No. 2004-02) and rezoning the property (AA
No. 2004-01), a resolution amending the City's general plan (GPA No.
2004-01), and a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02.
This resolution incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth herein,
the ordinance and resolutions and said Final Environmental Impact
Report, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and all of their respective facts, findings and conclusions
in support of this resolution and the findings made herein.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby, approves
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-02 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein.
H.
4.
5.
6.
75E-36
Resolution No. 2004-052
Page 3 of 4
8
8
8
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately after its adoption by the
City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting
this Resolution.
ADOPTED this - day of
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher
City Attorney
By:
Kylee O. Otto
Deputy City Attorney
AYES:
Councilmembers
NOES:
Councilmembers
ABSTAIN:
NOT PRESENT:
Councilmembers
Councilmembers
,2004.
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2004-052 to be the original resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75E-37
Resolution No. 2004-052
Page 4 of 4
Conditions for Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02
Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-02 (County Map No. 2003-262) is approved subject to compliance,
to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with all applicable sections of the Santa
Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform
Building Code and all other applicable regulations.
The applicant must comply in full with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the
rights conferred by this tentative tract map.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the
tentative tract map. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation
of the tentative tract map.
A.
Plannina Division
1.
The Final Map is required to be recorded within seven years of the date of approval
of the tentative map by the City Council.
2.
Two copies of the recorded Final Map need to be submitted each to the Planning
Division and Public Works Agency within 10 days of recordation.
3.
All development within the area of the map is subject to development and permit
fees in effect at the time of permit issuance.
4.
All development within the area of the map is subject to all design and
development standards in effect at the time of permit issuance.
5.
The tentative map, final map, and all improvements required to be made or
installed by the subdivider will be in accordance with the design standards and
specifications of the Santa Ana Municipal Code and the requirements of the State
Subdivision Map Act.
6.
All proposed site improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review approval of
DP No. 04-10.
7.
File, process and record Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) over
the parcels that include, but are not limited to, vehicular ingress and egress, cross
lot drainage, utilities, parking, emergency vehicle access, maintenance, irrigation
and landscaping.
EXHIBIT "An
75E-38
8B.
8
8
Public Works Aaencv
Prior to submittal of the map into technical plan check, complete the following:
1.
Revise the plan to depict all active water services and sewer laterals, currently
serving any of the existing buildings on the east side of Sycamore Street
(between Washington Avenue and Tenth Street), to be relocated to Main Street
before the Sycamore Street abandonment.
2.
Revise the plan to incorporate construction of any proposed "SITE Design" BMP's
(such as walkways with open joints, sidewalks and parking lot aisles with
minimum widths, draining sidewalks into adjacent landscaping, incorporating the
landscape area into drainage systems) to minimize the impervious areas and to
maximize permeability and natural areas. Reference the Orange County
Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and Local Implementation Plan (LIP).
3.
Revise the plan to incorporate construction of any proposed 'Treatment Control"
BMP's using the best available technology (such as biofilters, dry or wet detention
basins, landscape detentions, wet pond or wetlands, drainage inserts, filtration
basins) and recommend sizing calculations near pollutant sources, so as to
infiltrate and filter the pollutants of concern in post development runoff flow prior
to its discharge into any receiving body of water. Reference the Orange County
Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and Local Implementation Plan (LIP).
4.
Revise the plan to change "Lot 1" to "Parcel 1" at two locations on the plan since
this is a parcel map.
5.
Revise the plans to change the 4.34 acres notation to read 4.80 acres (shown
twice on the plan) to include the vacated area of Sycamore Street.
6.
Revise the plans to label the boundary of the proposed parcel as "Parcel
Boundary" since the proposed parcel line is not shown. Include the labeling of
the line segments enclosing the vacated area of Sycamore Street.
7.
Revise the plans to change the word "Revisionary" to "Reversionary" (shown
twice on the plan).
8.
Revise the plans to add the word "Dedication" to the "Corner Cutoff" references
(shown three times on the plan).
9.
Revise the plans to modify the proposed 17 foot by 17 foot corner cutoff
dedication at the southwest corner of Washington Avenue and Sycamore Street
to prevent the dedication from extending into the proposed parking structure and
show the corner cutoff terminating at the parcel boundary.
10.
Revise the plans to show the proposed parcel boundary concentric with and 1 0
feet inside the curb radius of 92 feet at the northwest corner of Tenth and
EXHIBIT "A"
75E-39
11.
12.
Sycamore Streets. Label the boundary "R = 82'," Arrow the spandrel area
between the existing and proposed lines "To be dedicated for right-of-way."
Revise the plans to add the following note to the map: "Note: This map is subject
to on-site easements of record that are to be abandoned or relocated so as to not
interfere with the proposed buildings. and also abandoned or relocated prior to
issuance of any building permits."
Depict the half-width dimensions of the remainder portion of Sycamore Street
south of the parcel boundary that crosses Sycamore Street.
EXHIBIT "A"
7 5E-40
8
8
8
June 29, 2004
City Clerk
JUN 30
9 ,,9 AM '04
20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor
0LL
GI1"'1 Or
-
... ¡;,i;;J, År~L
PO Box 1988-M30
Santa Ana, CA 92702
I understand that on Tuesday, July 6, 2004 the Santa Ana City Council will vote on the
proposed One Broadway Plaza. I also understand that construction of this 37-story structure
provides for the re-opening of Tenth Street between Main Street and Sycamore and this street
would be subject to use by many cars each day.
My child is a student at Orange County High School of the Arts (OCHSA) and must cross that
section of Tenth Street several times a day. I am writing to express my concern for the
safety of OCHSA students if Tenth Street is re-opened and to ask that you instead
move to abandon Tenth Street to OCHSA.
As the council noted in Resolution Number 2000-059, the closure of Tenth Street is necessary
to protect the students attending OCHSA. This resolution was passed when fewer cars used
Tenth Street each day. Opening Tenth Street, with no more protection for students than a
crosswalk, endangers more than 1,300 OCHSA students, including my child. In resolution
2000-059, you found:
(I) TENTH STREET IS NOT NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
ABUTTING PROPERTY;
(2) TENTH STREET DIVIDES THE OCHSA CAMPUS; AND
(3) CLOSING TENTH STREET IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT TJIF. STIJDENTS.
All three of those factors remain true today. Tenth Street is not necessary to provide access to
the abutting property, even with the proposed One Broadway Plaza project. It is merely a
convenience for the project and access is available on other streets. Tenth Street still divides
the school and closing Tenth Street remains necessary to protect students. In fact, OCHSA has
grown from 800 to 1,300 students since the time of that resolution. The risk now is even
greater than it was in 2000. It is clear that OCHSA is succeeding and is here to stay.
Therefore, the City should not only leave Tenth Street closed, the street should be abandoned
so that the school can use it for much needed open space. This should be done regardless of
whether the project is approved or rejected.
75E-41
At a meeting with OCHSA parents on June 15,2004, Mr. Michael Harrah, the developer of the
project, stated that student safety has always been a high priority. Mr. Harrah believes that
opening Tenth Street is not essential to the One Broadway Plaza project. He agreed that
leaving Tenth Street closed should be reviewed very closely. After listening to all of the
parent's concerns that opening Tenth Street would create a potentially dangerous situation for
OCHSA students, Mr. Harrah promised to contact the City and request the abandonment of
Tenth Street to OCSHA, rather than reopening Tenth Street as part of the project. I am writing
to request that you support this request and make the abandonment of Tenth Street to OCHSA
a staff priority and a required part of the project.
No amount of time or money is worth risking the life of a single child.
Please support the parent's and developer's request in reviewing the abandonment of Tenth
Street and keep our children safe. Please ensure that his letter is forwarded to the persons
within the City necessary to address this issue.
Regards,
~ õ:' ê/~
~n.~~
Felipe V. Golez
Dana N. Berkelrath
The parent of an OCHSA student
949-376-5341
75E-42
8
8
8
.June 30, 2004
Mayor and City Councilmembers:
The attached letters have been received from 10 individuals for
the .July 6, 2004 City Council Meeting, in support of Item. 75B -
One Broadway Plaza Office Tower project
75E-43
~
"I'" .
I In ill
, I
ij'¡
(,¡ ;:
'"' I... ¡~ .
CI, '( 0
,.¡.J
March 8, 2004
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92702
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Honorable Mayor and Council Members;
As a resident of Santa Ana I want to express my support for the proposed One
Broadway Plaza project. Santa Ana needs this project; it will create thousands of good-
paying jobs for Santa Ana residents both during and after construction.
One Broadway Plaza, by encouraging professional offices to relocate their
headquarters to our downtown, will help revitalize the DowntownlMidtown areas. The
developer has produced a well-designed plan that incorporates Santa Ana's historic past
with the needs of its current residents, including spacious plazas and gathering areas.
I encourage the council to move this project forward so we can regain the pride
and respect that Santa Ana, as the Capitol City of Orange County, deserves. Thank you
for this opportunity to share my enthusiasm for One Broadway Plaza and the exciting
growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana.
Sincerely,
1110L1J C)4~
75E-44
8
8
Ie
June 30, 2004
Mayor and City Councilmembers:
The attached letters have been received from 103 individuals for
the July 6, 2004 City Council Meeting, In support of Item. 75B -
One Broadway Plaza Office Tower project
75E-45
May 12, 2004
Mr. David Ream
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
.-(ð'
f.J'~
f 'r./f-- .
. .V'ßó~
II
PO Box 1988
Santa Ana, California
Dear Mr. Ream,
In Historic French Park, many residences and myself are in favor of and support the One Broadway
Plaza. To show that support, Patricia Bustamante and myself walked door to door on Saturday afternoon,
May 8, 2004, and Araceli Hernandez and myself on May 12, 2004 and asked the French Park residents if
they were familiar with the project and if they had any unanswered questions. We had a copy of the EIR
and the design package for the building. In a short time we collected over 100 letters of support of the
110 people we met. The reasons the 10 people that did not sign a letter were beæuse, one person was
upset with the installation of the traffic barriers and 3 people did not want to voice an opinion for fear of
their landlord, 2 people wanted to think about it, 3 people were unable to support the project beæuse of
the traffic impact, and one person thought the city had made a bad decision on the high density
apartments and didn't want growth in the dty. Over all we received a strong majority of positive support
for the One Broadway Plaza project. Enclosed are copies of these support letters. I am sure of more to
follow. There are also 5 letters included with this package of people visiting friends of French Park that
also live in Santa Ana that wanted to show their support as well.
~r~
~k"œ.~
1003 N. Spurgeon Street
Historic French Park
Santa Ana, CA 92701
714.321.6195
CC:
Mayor Miguel Pulido
The Santa Ana City Council
The Santa Ana Planning Commission
75E-46
._-~-;"_i!MI/t"
1. ~~'c,..~..~
.(:1::.- 0 N E' B' ï~-'O'A~[r 'V"¡~'A y P L A Z A
",L."';;.i~.~';;'" --~--~~~-----.~-------_.~-- ---- _.,;,;,;,-r¡'-~l
.'~I
.'~ì
iI. ';~ Letters
~~~ .~
11'1 Of
I.' ,,', f:
, ... '\ .
I:. ,:i~~ ..
I~fi;\:\ Support
41..11
i~IJI ¡ From
. r II, Santa Ana's Local
:. " Historic French Park
IIi' Residents:
....;¡.I:. :
- ' -
,
'1'. "~
,
~lNo.'"
",~ ~
~:'j,t
Volume Four
8
1200 North Main Street Suite 900 Santa Ana, California 92701 T 714.543.9484 F 714.543.9972
75E-47
Dear Mr. Harrah:
For years and years Santa Ana has needed an opportunity to be the
center of Orange county, the most beautiful county in tte world.
You are making a proposal to place the most~ beautiful jewel in
the heart of this city. I don't know if you will get all the
fortune 500 companies you want, I don't know if traffic is
going to to~x be a problem. what I do know is that every
neighborhood in this city should be giving yhou $200,000 for'
the excitement generated at your great proposal. It never
occurred to me that there would be any opposition to this--and
hope all that opposition turns to the joy and excitement I feel
at the opportunity and possibiliities you are creating, as if your
plan works--you are putting $10,000,000 a year into the population
of Santa ana through jobs, not to mention the ambiance of the beautiful
high rise restaurant, and placing this crystal edifice into the
sky for all to see. Having lived in Santa Ana for 57 years, you
are making Santa Ana's future far better than anyone ever expected.
Each time a great deed is done, whether for self-profit, whether just
out of being able to spend life at that glorious game of Monopoly,
or whetgher you m~ just want to make your own life more enjoyable than
an9ne else's, there is always a God Factor involved. As a Jeannie,
I wish I could grant you whatever you want, but as a resident of
Santa Ana, you have a fan, a friend, and an old broad who thinks
you are Elena are the most dynamic duo tfuis city could have imagined.
Jeannie Jackson
918 N. French
Santa Ana, CA 92701
(714) 836-5112
. .
7
75E-48
CARIBOU INDUSTRIES, INC.
8
One Broadway Plaza
"Preserving the past, ensuring the future"
-<--~:r~.~
.
,,', ...dj¡
\.., ~,.
..8!'f' '->.s...
f' ..
Today Tenth and Broadway.
The future for Tenth and Broadway!
8brUary 9, 2004
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Drive
Santa Ana, California
Dear Members of the Planning Commission and City Council:
I am very excited to hear about the proposed One Broadway Plaza project.
I am totally supportive of this project in every aspect and encourage 100% support from the Planning
Commission and from the City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to share my positive
enthusiasm for One Broadway Plaza and the exciting growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana and our
future.
Sincerely,
é#Jf¡f4-5 oj c¡JdYC ¿ LS f(/1I6-e~
Name p ~ FÆ~¡j/¿ If S--T; #/YI/J IJ
1¿/0)
ress
75E-49
CARIBOU INDUSTRIES, INC.
One Broadway Plaza
"Preserving the past, ensuring the future"
.
I: .cJt,
... ,.'.~
r - --.....~
- - ..,
~...
.
-~;;-------
.-..<:, ,
~...,-;sr;'
EI Pasado del Calle Dies y Broadway.
EI Futuro para Calle Dies Broadway!
May 7, 2004
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Drive
Santa Ana, California
Estimados Miembros de la Comision de Planificación y Concilio de la Ciudad:
Yo estoy muy entusiasmado de escuchar de la propuesta de el
prollecto de One Broadway Plaza.
Yo doy todo mi apollo total a este proyecto en todos los aspectos y animo a que la Comision de y el
Concilio de la Ciudad nos de el 100 % de su apollo. Gracias por darme la oportunidad de compartir
mi entuciasmo positivo para One Broadway Plaza y el entuciasmo de el encremento que esta por
delante para la Ciudad de Santa Ana y nuestro futuro.
Sinceramente,
l)¡/~ ~-rP
Nombre
83:ç V? f t2 lIc;f
Direccion .
----
~P?f-- a/J Po
f"$ 0 t
.-
75E-50
8
8
8
Page 1 of 1
Christensen, Angi
From: DonPayne@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 9:48
To: Alvarez, Claudia
Subject: One Broadway Plaza
Claudia,
We are very concerned about the proposed plan for One Broadway Plaza. Our main concern is for people's
safety.
There will be very serious traffic problems resulting from this oversized development, and there are no ways to
mitigate these problems. As residents of North Santa Ana. this will disrupt our lives every time we venture out of
our homes, either on foot or by any means of transportation.
Perhaps the largest safety issue is the fact that there are several schools immediately adjacent to the proposed
massive structure. Hundreds of schoolchildren's lives will be placed in jeopardy by their having to share paths
with thousands of automobiles, and at least two of these children will be our grandchildren.
The plans that have been presented to the city are irresponsible and show little appreciation for the safety of the
children or the quality of life for Santa Ana residents.
We urge you to disapprove the One Broadway Plaza plan to keep our citizens safe.
Don and Joanne Payne
2022 North Ross Street
Santa Ana, CA 92706
6/30/2004
75E-51
Page 1 of2
Christensen, Angi
From: Deb Reynolds [dlreynolds2000@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 9:38 PM
To: Alvarez, Claudia
Subject: OCHSA parent concern regarding One Broadway
Dear Ms. Alvarez;
I understand that on Tuesday, July 6, 2004 the Santa Ana City Council will vote on the proposed
One Broadway Plaza. I also understand that construction of this 37-story structure provides for
the re-opening of Tenth Street between Main Street and Sycamore and this street would be
subject to use by many cars each day.
My 2 children are students at Orange County High School of the Arts (OCHSA) and must cross
that section of Tenth Street several times a day, not only when being dropped off and picked up
but during the school day. I am writing to express my concern for the safety ofOCHSA
students if Tenth Street is re-opened and to ask that you instead move to abandon Tenth Street to
OCHSA.
As the council noted in Resolution Number 2000-059, the closure of Tenth Street is necessary to
protect the students attending OCHSA. This resolution was passed when fewer cars used Tenth
Street each day. Opening Tenth Street, with no more protection for students than a crosswalk,
endangers more than 1,300 OCHSA students, including my children. In resolution 2000-059,
you found:
(I) Tenth Street is not necessary to provide access to abutting property;
(2) Tenth Street divides the OCHSA campus; and
(3) Closing Tenth Street is necessary to protect the students.
All three of those factors remain true today. Tenth Street is not necessary to provide access to
the abutting property, even with the proposed One Broadway Plaza project. It is merely a
convenience for the project and access is available on other streets. Tenth Street still divides the
school and closing Tenth Street remains necessary to protect students. In fact, OCHSA has
grown from 800 to 1,300 students since the time of that resolution. The risk now is even greater
than it was in 2000. It is clear that OCHSA is succeeding and is here to stay. Therefore, the
City should not only leave Tenth Street closed, the street should be abandoned so that the school
can use it for much needed open space. This should be done regardless of whether the project is
approved or rejected.
At a meeting with OCHSA parents on June 15,2004, Mr. Michael Harrah, the developer of the
project, stated that student safety has always been a high priority. Mr. Harrah believes that
opening Tenth Street is not essential to the One Broadway Plaza project. He agreed that leaving
Tenth Street closed should be reviewed very closely. After listening to all of the parent's
concerns that opening Tenth Street would create a potentially dangerous situation for OCHSA
students, Mr. Harrah promised to contact the City and request the abandonment of Tenth Street
to OCSHA, rather than reopening Tenth Street as part of the project. I am writing to request that
6/30/2004
75E-52
8
8
8
Page 2 of2
you support this request and make the abandonment of Tenth Street to OCHSA a staff priority
and a required part of the project.
No amount of time or money is worth risking the life of a single child.
Please support the parent's and developer's request in reviewing the abandonment of Tenth
Street and keep our children safe. Please ensure that this letter is forwarded to the persons
within the City necessary to address this issue.
Regards,
Ve60rali ~ynot:ás
The parent of two OCHSA students
6/30/2004
75E-53
GARY & ]UUE HUMPHREYS
2112 N. Ross Street
Santa Ana,CA 92706
(714) 541-3452
March 25, 2004
HH 30
8 58 Ai:! lOti
C L [.1
C;T.Y U ~- ~;;\:¡ r ~.' .:', ;i';. '
The Honorable Miguel Pulido
Mayor
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92701
Re: One Broadway Plaza
Dear Mayor Pulido:
I was especially heartened to learn that the One Broadway Plaza project was NOT
approved at the last City Counsel meeting, pending further review. This was a very wise
decision.
As much as I like the idea of responsible new development in Santa Ana and
revitalization throughout the city, this project is grossly out of scale, . does not conform to the
general city plan, and is poorly conceived. There is already a glut of available office space in
North and Central Orange County, and there have been no assurances that there are many
businesses clamoring to inhabit the One Broadway Plaza location. Not surprisingly, because the
traffic situation on Broadway and surrounding streets is already horrendous both morning and
evenings.
What mitigation efforts will address the proposed influx of thousands of potential new
tenants/workers? Surrounding neighborhoods will be adversely affected by frustrated commuters
searching for an alternate route. Having lived through a similar situation in Floral Park when the
5 Freeway was expanded, I know too well the adverse affects upon a neighborhood that is
overrun by unbridled commuter traffic. Only, in my case, the traffic did reduce when the
expansion was complete; the neighbors of One Broadway Plaza cannot hope for any such future
relief.
I am also greatly concerned about locating this gargantuan commercial building next door
to two public schools. How can Santa Ana claim to put "education first" if it approves a project
that puts schoolchildren at great personal risk both during years of heavy construction and with
greatly increased traffic thereafter? What other city would ever allow this?
I understand that some planning officials have noted that because there isn't really a
viable way to mitigate the anticipated increased traffic (because it's already really bad), no
mitigation measures will be required. That's the same mentality as putting oil on a fire, "because
it's already burning."
75E-54
8
8
8
Moreover, what guarantee does the City have that this project will even be completed as
proposed? What is to prevent the developer from walking away prior to completion or even
afterward if the hoped-for tenants fail to materialize, leaving Santa Ana with not just another
empty building, but a monstrous eyesore in the bargain? Has the financing been obtained? Have
architects and other designers already utilized actually been paid? Where is the ironclad
commitment from the developer that legally locks him in and puts him at substantial risk? What
recourse is there by the City if thé proponents' rosy assurances or expectations don't pan out in
the future? Will Santa Ana be left holding the bag?
And why does it have to be so gosh-darned tall? There already is a "tallest building in
Orange County" somewhere and I'll bet not one in ten thousand residents could even care less,
much less identify it. Such a moniker only lasts until the next one is built anyway, and whatever
temporary cache it supposedly brings frankly smacks more of a phallic obsession than anything
else. I understand the building trades and commercial real estate industry favor this project. Yet
it takes about the same number of people to build a 10 - 15 story building as it does to build a 35
story building-they're just not employed for as long a period of time. In any event, these aren't
pennanent jobs.
I recently took a trip to Paris, and in one part ofthat otherwise beautiful city, an enonnous
boxy skyscraper, the Montparnasse Tower, stands all alone amid a sea of older 2 to 4-story
buildings. As one travel writer aptly noted, "it looks like the box the Eiffel Tower came in." It
looks so grossly out of place and is such an unattractive structure, one can only wonder, what
were the city leaders thinking? Completed in the early 1970's, it was then the tallest building in
Europe, but, inevitably, it soon lost that claim as well. The building is now fairly seedy and not
fully occupied (if it ever was), but is nevertheless a pennanent blight on the cityscape, and is the
towering monument to a gross lapse in responsible city planning. (After it was built, a disgusted
public passed a law preventing buildings over 7 stories from being built in the area.)
Of course, Santa Ana is not Paris, but many of the issues about the reasonableness of this
proposed project are similar. You have another opportunity to reconsider whether this ugly glass
tower is really a legacy you'd like to leave behind in Santa Ana. What's the worst that could
happen if this project is not approved? This is not the only opportunity that will come the City's
way. The known negatives clearly outweigh the glossy, but largely illusory, positives.
Please vote NO on One Br adway Plaza. Thank you for your consideration,
JPH:bm
=ñomeowner and voter
75E-55
-
Gary and Julie Humphreys
2112 N. Ross Street
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(714) 541-3452
June 28, 2004
Mayor Miguel Pulido,
City Clerk and members of the Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor
PO Box 1988-M30
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Re: One Broadway Plaza Project
Dear Mayor Pulido and City Council Members:
I am writing as a parent of an OCHSA student, a concerned resident of Floral Park, and a reliable
registered voter to express my many concerns about the proposed One Broadway Plaza project.
Student Safety: I attended the June 14, 2004 Santa Ana Planning Commission meeting on the
One Broadway Plaza project and was appalled by the total disregard by Commission members
for the very real and identifiable safety issues created by the proposed development as to
OCHSA and other nearby public school students. In fact, planning commission member Chris
Leo not only disparagingly dismissed these "safety issues" as simply a last-ditch effort to delay
this project, he also displayed his total ignorance of the applicable law by falsely stating that
such safety iss].les were solely the concern of the school district, and not the city. Commission
member Glen Mondo, who should have recused himself from this matter because he also sits on
the OCHSA Board of Trustees-and, thus has a fiduciary obligation toward the safety of the
OCHSA students-should have corrected Mr. Leo on this important legal point, but inexplicably
chose to remain silent.
To the extent that you or any other member of the City Council also shares the common, but
mistaken, opinion that the safety of students traveling to and from school is the sole
responsibility of the school district and not the city, this is simply wrong. To the extent that the
city creates a dangerous condition on public property, it is the city that faces liability for any
damages caused thereby. In fact, given the city of Santa Ana's past actions with respect to the
closure of Tenth St., Santa Ana could face significant liability if this project is allowed to
proceed as currently planned. If you have any doubts about the potential liability of the city for
an accident on Tenth St. (say by a car hitting a student crossing at Sycamore), I strongly urge you
to seek an immediate legal opinion from the city attorney (or, better yet, from an independent
law firm experienced in municipal liability) prior to voting on this project. It shouldn't take any
competent attorney more than a few hours to confirm this important legal point for you.
75E-56
8
8
8
2
Tenth Street Reopening-A Clear Danger to Students: Currently, a small portion of Tenth
St. (between Main and Sycamore) is closed to vehicular traffic due to Resolution 2000-059
adopted by the Santa Ana City Council that, among other things, deemed such closure necessary
to protect the safety of OSCHA students. [A copy of this resolution is attached for your
reference.] Inasmuch as the OCHSA campus encompasses buildings on both sides of Tenth
Street, OCHSA students regularly traverse Tenth Street throughout the school day to access each
portion of the campus.
The development plans for the One Broadway Plaza project calls for the reopening of Tenth St.
to be used as a one-way eastbound exit point for potentially several thousand cars of future
tenants and employees of OBP-without any basis for retracting the finding that supported
the street closure initially: that such closure was necessary for student safety. In fact, the
reopening of Tenth Street as proposed would greatly exacerbate the threat to student safety-far
beyond the situation that existed when the street was first closed for safety reasons. Several
hundred students still must cross Tenth Street throughout the day to access school buildings, yet
now it is proposed to intentionally funnel several thousand vehicles down this very street at the
same time it is being used by the students.
Additionally, the plans call for the erection of a large fountain in the intersection of Tenth and
Sycamore (which is to become a sort of round-about) that could block the vision of eastbound
drivers to pedestrians crossing Tenth Street at Sycamore. Further, to the extent that OCHSA
facilities are utilized by elementary students walking to and from any of the three other nearby
public schools, these hazards are extended to even younger children.
These plans for Tenth Street pose an extremely dangerous hazard for the safety and well being of
the students. Even without this project, Santa Ana suffers an inordinately high rate of
pedestrian/vehicular accidents. The threat to students posed by this development is not just
foreseeable, but is both severe and preventable. In short, the development agreement calls for
the reopening of Tenth St. despite the fact that all three factual findings of Resolution 2000-059
remain in effect.
This hazard is preventable because the reopening of Tenth St. is not necessary to provide ingress
or egress from the OBP building. In fact, according to statements made by developer Mike.
Harrah at June 14,2004 meeting with myself an a few dozen other OCHSA parents, his original
plans called for Tenth S1. to remain closed; that even under the current plan access to/from the
building is gained via other streets, and that it was the city planning and/or public works officials
which insisted that Tenth St. be reopened-further evidence that it is the city that is creating the
dangerous condition. Obviously, the simplest solution is to keep Tenth St. closed or, better yet,
abandon it to OCHSA. In fact, Mr. Harrah promised parents and OCHSA officials at that
6/14/04 meeting that he would immediately seek to amend his plans to keep Tenth St. closed.
This change may cause a short delay in the project, but will probably save lives (not to mention
millions in potential future city liability) and is simply the right thing to do. The city should do
whatever it can to facilitate the continued closure of Tenth S1.
Unsafe Student Pick Up and Drop Off: Currently, most students are dropped off either in the
existing OCHSA parking lot or along Sycamore and Main St.. The development plans for OBP
call for the abandonment of Sycamore S1. as a public street (north of Tenth Street adjacent to the
75E-57
3
OCHSA building), preventing student pickup along Sycamore, in the OCHSA parking lot, and
on Main St. Instead, plans call for student pick up and drop off in a narrow lot immediately
south of the Perfonning Arts building. The proposed driving pattern calls for two-way traffic in
this lot so that students dropped off by eastbound cars on the south end, must walk north across
westbound cars in the same lot to reach the campus.
All students must then again cross Tenth St. to access the OCHSA campus. This dangerous
situation on public property is repeated in reverse when school is out. Moreover, since OCHSA
enjoys an extended day program, several hundred students will be exiting the campus and
attempting to traverse south across Tenth St. at the end of the workday when thousands of
tenants and employees at OBP will also be attempting to exit OBP using eastbound Tenth Street.
These plans pose a severe hazard for the safety and well being of the students, which is both
foreseeable and preventable.
Inadequate and Dangerous Bus Loading. As explained by Mr. Harrah at the June 14th
meeting, the existing plans call for school buses to stop eastbound on Tenth St. adjacent to
OCHSA to load and unload passengers. Parents were nonplussed by this proposal inasmuch as
current law requires all traffic to stop during school bus passenger loading and unloading when
red lights flash. Thus, all eastbound cars-including OCHSA parents who have just dropped of
students in the "official" drop-off lot south of the Perfonning Arts building-will be required to
stop and wait for bus loading and unloading. This will cause traffic to back up on Tenth St. and
southbound Sycamore St., creating a further safety hazard for students attempting to cross Tenth
St. at Sycamore. Additionally, since buses will remain stopped with lights flashing until full (or
empty), this delay could be significant-particularly in the afternoon.
Moreover, since bus doors are located on the right-hand side of buses, even if buses are parked
on the left curb of the one-way, eastbound Tenth St. (as proposed), students must walk into the
adjacent traffic lanes to enter and exit the buses, creating a clear and undeniable safety hazard,
since it is reasonably foreseeable that not every driver will actually stop when the bus's red
flashing lights are on. (In fact, Mr. Harrah, himself, seemed shocked to learn that this was the
law when this dangerous flaw in the plan was pointed out to him by OCHSA parents.) Again,
however, this dangerous condition can be easily eliminated by the closure of Tenth St., allowing
access only for emergency vehicles and school buses, as currently exits.
Construction Hazards and Debris: The construction of a 37-story building and 8+ story
parking garage is no small operation, and to pennit this to be done within shouting distance of
four public schools is unprecedented, if not appalling. Even with temporary construction
fencing, falling dust and debris as well as the constant traffic of huge heavy machinery and
trucks is dangerous to any pedestrian, let alone hundreds of young people. Moreover, the noise
levels of heavy machinery and other construction equipment during school hours-which is
expected to last for several years-is hannful to those nearby and is extremely detrimental to
adequate concentration and learning. The current development agreement does not mandate that
noisy pile driving be perfonned while school is not in session; it does not call for a clear plan to
keep construction traffic away from students and other pedestrians, and even with tarps wrapping
each floor during construction, things will still fall off. A screwdriver (or even a few nails)
75E-58
8
8
8
4
dropped from 37 stories, can cause fatal injuries, and depending upon prevailing winds, won't
necessarily fall straight down into the construction zone below.
Indemnity and Insurance. The developer agreement doesn't specifically require the developer
to obtain a minimum amount of third party liability insurance. It should. Moreover, the city
should require the developer not only to obtain and maintain such insurance (including
completed operations coverage), but it should require the city to be named as an additional
insured on the developer's policy, and any renewals thereafter. This will cost the city nothing,
(most carriers don't even charge the named insured-i.e., the developer-additional premiums
for this) but will provide significant coverage for the city (including both defense and indemnity
expenses) in the event the city is named as a defendant in any litigation arising out of the project.
Additionally, the purported indemnity clause in the current developer agreement is practically
worthless, as written, and will not provide the city with the protection is purportedly seeks. In
addition to the separate insurance provision discussed, the city should have an experienced
liability attorney draft a "Type I" indemnity provision to be inserted into the developer
agreement. These clauses are fairly simple to draft, but could save the city millions and millions
of dollars in the event of any future litigation, and are well worth any slight delay or additional
attorneys fees incurred at this time.
Post 9/11 Issues: The development agreement calls for the creation of the "tallest building in
Orange County"-an icon to reinvigorate the county seat, etc. Even if one feels the threat to the
tallest tower in Orange County is relatively small, we live in a post-9/11 world. Under
Homeland Security Department disaster planning regulations, local agencies must still identify
potential targets in their area (like the federal building, the airport, theme parks, the tallest
building in Orange County, etc.) and adopt planning measures in the event of an emergency.
See, e.g., the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key
Assets, http://www.dhs.aov/interweb/assetlibrarv/Phvsical Strateav.pdf See also the National
Incident Management System (NIMS). In fact, the Federal Emergency Management Division has
adopted a "Primer for Design of Commercial Buildings to Mitigate Terrorist Attacks" to help
building owners and local governments mitigate the threat of hazards resulting nom terrorist
attacks on new buildings-including not just explosions, but chemical, biological and
radiological attacks as well. http://www.fema.aov/Ddflfima/427/fema427 cvr-toc.pdf
Even if primary responsibility for building design and safety rests with the developer, there will
be disaster planning costs which will necessarily be incurred by local agencies (city, fire, policy
and other first responders) due to the presence of a new "icon" within the city center. It does not
appear from a review of the ElR or the Developer Agreement that any of these issues or costs
have been considered by the city, much less that the developer be required to offset the
additional costs to be incurred by local agencies for planning and implementing measures to be
taken in the event of such an emergency.
Unmitigated Traffic and Quality of Life Issues: Whether or not the implementation of the
OBP building is a worthwhile departure nom the Specific Midtown Plan or an irresponsible
example of inappropriate "spot zoning," the draft EIR recognizes that air quality, water supply,
waste water, and traffic congestion will be severely impacted without and potential mitigation.
Anyone attempting to travel through the downtown area (and surrounding streets) already
75E-59
5
experiences severe and frustrating congestion. The draft EIR recognizes that further impacts to
the major streets and intersections near the project will not only reduce the level of service of
roadways and intersections to unacceptable levels, but that "mitigation measures to reduce
potential traffic. . . to a level considered less than significant have been determined to be not
feasible." In other words, it's already bad, this project will make it even worse, and there's
nothing that can be done about it.
Is this any way to plan for the future growth of the city? Who will want to come back to the
downtown area when they won't be able to move due to all the congestion? ProfessionaVupscale
tenants have moved to newer parts of the county not just because new buildings provide
technological advancements; the surrounding public infrastructure and transportation corridors
have been specifically planned for such large-scale development. It is inconceivable that the city
of Santa Ana would consider moving forward on this project when it the EIR states that
significant and substantial adverse impacts will result for which there is no feasible mitigation.
Councilmember Alvarez Should Abstain: The Santa Ana Municipal Code provides:
"Sec. 425. Disqualification due to campaign contributions.
A councilmember shall not participate in, nor use his or her official position to
influence, a decision of the city council if it is reasonably foreseeable that the
decision will have a material financial effect, apart from its effect on the public
generally or a significant portion thereof, on a recent major campaign contributor.
As used herein, "recent major campaign contributor" means a person who has
made campaign contributions totalling two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) or
more to the councilmember or to any campaign committee controlled by the
councilmember in the twelve-month period immediately preceding the date of the
decision. The mayor is a councilmember for purposes of this section."
At the March 15, 2004 City Council meeting, Councilmember Alvarez cast a vote on the One
Broadway Plaza project despite the fact that she admittedly had accepted a campaign
contribution in excess of $250 from developer Mike Harrah with the 12 months preceding that
vote. She purported to justify this act on advice from the city attorney that the municipal code
applied only to city council races, and not to her campaign for the Orange County Board of
Supervisors.
This is a blatant distortion of both the clear letter and intent of the municipal code which on its
face specifically refers to anv camoaien committee controlled by the councilmember, and is not
in any way limited to city council races. Ms Alvarez campaigned for the supervisor position
utilizing her credentials as a city council member. Moreover, as an attorney, and an assistant
district attorney to boot, she is legally and ethically obligated to uphold both the spirit and the
letter of the law. As a public servant, she is further obligated to both avoid the appearance of
impropriety and refrain from violating the public trust. Her past conduct in voting on this project
is reprehensible and should be publicly condemned, if not criminally prosecuted. Under no
circumstances should she cast any further vote on this project.
75E-60
8
8
8
6
The thought of a new modern tower to reinvigorate the downtown area and encourage
revitalization is a tempting one. The idea of first-class dining with a view of the county is also
inviting. I also do not want to discourage anyone from wanting to invest serious money in our
downtown area, or turn away construction jobs for many workers. But this kind of development
is indeed a marked departure from the existing city midtown plan, and should not come at the
expense of the safety of our students or the quality of life of our citizens. You must insist that
the known safety issues and adverse impacts be resolved before this project is approved.
75E-61
RESOLUTION NO, 2000-050
A RESOLUTJONOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF mE CITY OF
SANTA ANA CLOSING TO VEHICUlAR TRAFFIC THAT
PORTION OF TENTH STREET BETWEEN MAIN STREET
AND SYCAMO~E STREET
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Cm'COUNCIL OF THE em' OF SANTA ÞW. AS
FOLLOWS:
1. The Ci1y Council of the CiIy of Santa Ana hereby, finds,dðtermineA and
dedates æfolows:
o.
A.
The Orange County High School for the Ms (OCHSA), a non.ptOfit
charter $ChOoI which WIlt open Its doors in the next few daya, has
requ8atedlhe city to dose 10th Shtt bètN$en Main Street and
S~more Street in order to protect It$ studen1$ who have to c;:rop this
stteet during the school day. The OCHSA campus, which consi$ts of four
Sèparate bUildinQa. extend, On both .ides of 10th Street be\W06n M.in
and Sycamore.
$ection 21102 of the California Vehicle Coòe aJlO'IoVa a city COI.ln<:Q t.O cIo8e
a street which divides a school to vehicular ttaffic when in the opirlion of
tho .cfty council thecf()$ure Is necessary to protect the student! attending
the school .
e.
c.
HavIng COI'\SÎderedê. eVidence subMItted. induding pubic comment if any,
this Council finØs that ~id $!Feet Is may be ctœed for vemcular tralfic.,
böt$8d uþofl the fonowing findings of f$ct
1.
Said street is not necessary to provide acçess to abutting property
owners; and
2,
said street d'lVides a school: and
ClO$íng laid street i$ necessary to protect the studonts atten(jing the
school.
3.
Put$uaM to the Vohîcfe Code. the portion of said stMt may be dosed
Ol"lly to vehiclJ1ar traffic, It remains a pUbli~ $treet 8<:œs$ible to an
member$ ohhe publÌiC a$ ped8$tlians. 11\ addition,1f there are any in-plaœ
public utaity fac41ities Ihat are in USé in ht portjon of said ~t. the City
fecaln$ .aÞ l'ignts t.O right to maìnt.ain. Qpel'Qte. l'eþlace. remove or install new .
pubtlc utility facilities.
R8IoMkIn No. 2000.05$
P.'Iof4 \
75E-62
8
8
8
2 lheCIty ~ hal revl8WtKt and contíø.~ the Inførtn8tíon ~
in \he aòØenOum togethef with ttIre Inltl8l 'tudy and the nep8tîYe d8CIIrdonpl'llpJ.
with .~ t.c this resOlution The City Council has, 8. 8 result ofltt oontId.rlflon.
.no tie ~1ØeI'ooe ~ted at 1M rnøetíng. determined that, .. ,.,., PUllUtnt to
the Cdtoma EnV1J'O(.rnental Quality Ad (.CECA") and the State CEQAGuldeJìn8I, .
.ne.gatM dedar'8fJOn and 8ðdendum edeQuately addrflaea the 64\8Ct8d erwlronm6nt81
~ of "" I"MOMJOn On the bUll of this revIeW. the City Council ftncø that there
Is no....œnce tromwtllc:h n can be faírly arQued that the project wi! have . lignJfic8nt
~ .fted on the environment The City Council hereby ....r$ee and approves the
~ declaratJon and 8dOendum and dlrecta that the Noüoe of Det8rrniMtionbe
Øft!PII8d I1Id filed with the County Clerk of the County of Ol'8nge In the manner
required by n. Purau.nt to TItJe XIV, ClÙifornla Code of Regulatiorw ("CCR")
§ 735.5(c)(1). the CIty Council h8I determined that, after considering the record as a
whole. there. no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any
....... effect on wildife resources or the habitat upon which th6 wHdllfe depends.
l'liefebe. pursuant to FISh and Game Coøe § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 735.5(8)(3),
the payment of Fish ancr Game Department filing feel is not required In conjunction with
tIVs projec1.
3. Th$ Council does hereby ordef that the portion of Tenth Street between
Maín Street and Sycamore Street. more specffically shown in "Exhibit 1" attached hereto
and made a part hereof by this reference, be. and the same are, àoted for vehicWar
traftic until bthet' action of this Coundl.
4. Staff is direCted to pott appropriate traffic control signs giving notice of the
partial dosure of Tenth Street. Pursuant to seclion 21102 of the Vehicle Code, this
resolution shall be effective upon the posting of said signs. .
5. This resolution, effecting the do$ure of a portion of Tenth Stræt to vehic:ular
tnIftic, may be repeaJed st any time by a further resolUtion of the City COUncil.
ADOPTED this
5~
day of SeDtember.20oo.
ATTEST:
~.. /14;
C--- ,--:-"A, r
'-- :; ¿¿. i.-Ut' /.l..l (. ..:¡
Patricia E. Healy , J
CIer1c of the Council '
RosoILfjon No. 200().Ø9
Pape 2 øl04
75E-63
02/27/2017 11~26 FAX
~001
Fax
To:
Santa Ana CiIy Council
From:
Roberta Reed
Pax:
714/647-6956
Pageel 3 (including cover sheet)
Phone: 7141647-ô520
Date:
6/1312004
Rêl
Comments for 6114/04 Planning
CC:
Commission I-Ieõlring on the OBP
Development Agreement
X Ul'lent
[] For Revlow
[J Please Comment
[] PI...- R8pIy
0 PI_- R8cyde
. Comments: Please find attached written comments on the One Broadway Plaza Development
Agreement, which is scheduled on the Q/14104 agenda for the Planning CommÍ!:&ion for their
consideration. Please submit copies of these comments to the City Council members for their
considl!!ration. Copy wIth orfglnal signature will be submìtt8d in person at the Plitnning Commission
Meeting.
75E-64
02/27/2017 11:27 FAX
~002
8
8
8
Roberta Reed
1205 South Parton Street
Santa Ana, CalifornIa 92707
Plannin9 Commission
City of Santa Ana
Planning and Building Agency
20 Civic Center Plaza
SanbJ Ana, California 92701
June 14, 2004
Members of the Planning Comml$sion:
Tonight. YOu have before you fOr Consideration the One Broadway Plaza Development
Agreement.
On February 24, 2004, by majority vote the Planning Commission recommended the One
Broadway Plaza project for approval. While I realize that the actual merits of the project
are not up for consideration tonight, feel first compelled 10 again reiterate my belief that
this project. in its proposed location, is not goOd for the City of Santa Ana and its citizens.
One clarification is in order: Page 3 of the Request for Planning Commission Action st~tes
that "This agreement has incorporated tile major issues raiséd at the March City Council
hearing as well as those issues raised by the Ad Hoc Committee.' This statement is false.
While the Development Agreement addresses some of the issues raised at the March
Public Hearing, in no way does it address the majority of the concerns stated that night.
The majority of concerns addressed the inadequacies of the êlR document and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, as well as the number of significant environmental
impacts that were not mitigated in the EIR As such, these issues have not been
addressed by the Development Agreement, and it is no way ìncorporatés anything close to
all of the major issues rsised at the Public Hearing.
While I believe that the members of the Ad Hoc Committee and City Staff made an honest
effort to draft an agreement that protects the interests of the city and Its citizens, no
development agreement will be able to protect us from the fact that the EIR does not
provide mitigations for many of the significant environmental impacts identified for this
project. Because there are no mitigations proposed for many of these significant Impacts,
the Development Agreement does not contain any provisions for these significant impacts.
For this reason, the Development Agreement is not adequate, and not supportable as a
tool of good planning.
Specific to the Development Agreement. I have the following comments:
Improvement #4 in Exhibit C calls for installing a new traffic signal at Broadway and the
parking structure, as previously described in the EIR- On pa9~ 12 of the One Broadway
Plaza Specific Development District document, Point (n) requires the Developer to "install
75E-65
02/27/2017 11:27 FAX
1lI00J
p;.ge 2
Roberta Reed. CQmmenw to Planning Commission
June 14, 2004
either a traffic signai or a raised median at the Halesworth Street and Broadway
intersection a5 determined by the Public Works Agency," These two appear to be in
conflict. Figure T-17 ofthe EIR $hows a median at Halesworth and the EIR states that a
signal will be installed at the egress from the Parking Structure approximately 80 feet north
of Halesworth. It is unclear if the One Broadway Plaza Development District document is
referring to the same traffic signal as Exhibit C or an addltional signal. ReQard, lewi any of
these scenarios: removal of the median, removal of the traffic signal, or the addition of a
traffic signal all result in changing the mitigation rneasure as stated in the EIR. To make
such a change, without allowing for adequate review and comment by the interer;;ted
public, would be improper under CECA regulations.
Secondly, the Development Agreement states that as a condition of issuance of bUilding
permits, the OWner must obtain binding commitments of lease for at least 50% of the
leasable space of the project from tenants who would qualify as "Invewtment Grade
Tenants," a rating of BBB- or greater, as rated by either Standard and Poor's or Moody's.
According to Standard and Poor's definition, a BBB- rating is the lowest rating before non-
investment grade. The next lower rating, BB, is defined as "less vulnerable in the near
term but faces major on-going uncertainties to adverse business, financial, and economic
conditions."
It would appear that almost any business that is not in current financial difficulty would be
able to qualify to lease space in One Broadway Plua, per this agreement. The question
must be asked: if this development is so neoossary, and Class A office space is so
desperately needéd to bring desirable tenants to downtown Santa Ana, is this the level of
tenant we want to attract? Or does this send a subtle message to the community that we
do not have confidence that this building can attract tenants with higher credit ratings and
that we must be content with those with a credit rating of "the lowest rating before non-
investment grade"?
Again, I urge you to carefuny considèr your decisions in this matter.
Sincerely,
rifbNxta a.~
Roberta A. Reed
cc:
Santa Ana City Council
75E-66
:.!.I
8..
..
"
e
lie
I
1=
,.
SANTA-ANA
..
..
May 20, 2004
Honorable Miguel Pulido, Mayor
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
. Santa Ana, CA 92701
Subject: One Broadway Plaza
Dear Mayor Pulido:
On May 5, 2004 the Board of Directors for the Historic French Park Association (HFPA)
voted to oppose the One Broadway Plaza project. HFPA affirmed this vote a week later
on May 13. I have been directed by our Board to çonvey this to you.
, ...
. .
.. .. <
. . - . .
'One Broadway Plaza is a 37-story glass tower. To accommodate the developer, the
.City proposes to replace the Midtown Specific Plan with the .One Broadway Plaza
District" along that portion of the Broadway Corridor. This change will set a precedent
that will undermine future efforts to protect our city from unplanned growth. .
"
For over20 years the Historic French Park Association has worked to protect and
enhance the quality of life of its residents. We have worked closely with the City on .
many important projects that directly affected our neighborhood. We have actively
engaged the City on the hard issues of gangs, crime, and traffic as we struggled to
, improve our historic neighborhood. This long relationship has benefited both the City
and the HFPA, as together we have sought solutions to a number of cOll)plex problems.
Happily, we have met many of our mutual goals through this cooperative spirit. .
As a neighborhood, we desire the benefits that thoughtful.. sensitive land use planning
can bring. We have strongly supported the City's adopted MidtoWn Specific Plan and its
vision for growth along Broadway and Main Street between 10th and 1ih Streets. The
Plan is our only tool to protect the historic buildings, height limits and wide setbacks and
other features that collectively serve to maintain the beauty and historic character of the
Broadway Corridor and the Midtown area. . .'
We have supported attracting businesses and services to the Midtown area that are
useful to the nearby neighborhoods. However, we do not support the One Broadway
I .
:;;l HISTORIC FRENCH PARK ASSOCIATION,
:11
P.O. 1c5E~7ANTA
ANA, CA 9,2702, WWW.F,RENCHPARK.ORG s:
Plaza office tower project. OBP will carve out a huge piece of the Midtown Specific
Plan, effectively nullifying that adopted document. The new zoning for OBP will conflict
with the surrounding zoning, and will induce growth on a scale out of proportion to the
Midtown Specific Plan. OBP will significantly worsen traffic by bringing thousands of
additional vehicle trips to our neighborhood and the Midtown area. The added traffic will
threaten the safety of thousands of children who attend nearby schools. OBP will
destroy several historic structures, and will threaten others by removing important
restrictions that protect historic homes and low-density office buildings. OBP will also
fail to resolve the City's financial problems, because it will be a tax drain and not a tax
generator. One Broadway Plaza is short-sighted, short-term, and impulsive.
There are many opinions as to how best to improve the Midtown area. Creating a spot-
zone required to accommodate OBP is not one of them. To address the City's desire to
spark interest in the Midtown Specific Plan, we suggest the City undertake a
comprehensive update of the Plan. We recommend that all stakeholders be invited to
participate--as was done when the Plan was conceived. Invite area neighborhoods
and businesses, so everyone is invested and working together toward a unified vision.
A revised Midtown Specific Plan should reflect the vision of a growing and prosperous
Santa Ana that honors its historic roots and the unique character of its neighborhoods.
I look forward to your reply and the opportunity to participate in the process to create a
better Santa Ana. If you have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 569-9293.
~
Paul Giles, Presiden
Historic French Park Association
Cc: City Council
Planning Commission
Historic Resources. Commission
75E-68
8
8
8
March 11, 2004
Mayor Miguel Pulido
Council Members, Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
RE: One Broadway Plaza Project
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
I am writing to ask you to vote "no" on the EIR certification and project approval for the
One Broadway Plaza project, which I understand will be voted on at the March 15, 2004
City Council meeting.
As a private citizen and a& the President of the S¡ulta Ana Historical Preservation Society,
I have expressed my concerns with this project on numerous occasions. After a thorough
reading of the DEIR and EIR, I have been openly and adamantly opposed to this project.
The EIR contains a multitudc of unmitigatable adverse impacts to traffic, air quality and
cultural resources, to name a few. While it is clear from the EIR that this ill conceived
project would have a lasting detrimental affect to the environment and the quality of life
of Santa Ana's Citizens, I am convinced that it will also have a negative financial impact,
draining resources from City infrastructure and giving little in return.
I am shocked to learn that, for a project of this magnitude and obvious impact to the City,
there have been no study sessions for the Council to allow them to make an infonned
decision. In various conversations with Council Members, City Staff and
Commissioners, when support for this project comes up, it is based on emotional
buzzwords and phrases with no facts or substance behind them. The project will "put us
on the map"; "bring jobs to out of work citizens"; "be filled with Fortune 500
companies"; "bring redevelopment to Downtown"; "contribute lots of money in taxes and
licenses." I have seen no facts, figures, studies or reports to substantiate any of these
claims. As elected officials, I expect you to also demand such detailed infonnation.
So imagine my further shock to read this afternoon the same hollow, emotional and
unsubstantiated cJaims in the official "Statément of OveITiding Considerations." Since
the negative impacts of the project are overwhelmingly clear and supported by fact and
studies cited in the EIR, I expected City officials to require extremely compelling and
fact -based justification for recommending the project. Was I ever wrong. Here are some
of the "justifications" that are supposed to override everything that is wrong with this
project:
.
creates a new City landmark to serve as a "focal point" (does this have any intrinsic
value?)
provides more Class A office space:
.
75E-69
.
. to ensure "long term viability" of the area so downtown will not "under
perform" as the urban core (what does this mean? in what way will this office
space make downtown "viable" or better performing?)
. to attract high profile tenants and tenants needing to be close to government
offices (in what way will this benefit the City? where is the financial
analysis?)
. to attract tenants who wíll support "cultural and business activities" (what are
these activities and in what way will they benefit the citizens?)
provide a "world class restaurant" (I won't even honor this one with a comment)
"preserve" the Broadway area with new palm trees and fountains (this is insulting,
considering the loss of at least 3 historic buildings, and future loss of trees and set-
backs due to street widening, and has no measurable value)
"substantially increase" employment opportunities (again where is the proof? won't
tenants bring their existing work forces? what about off-shoring trends? How many
construction jobs and for how long?)
provide parking for the public (how much and at what cost?)
acting as a "catalyst for future improvements" (this point also is heavy on buzz words
like "revitalization", "redevelopment", "vibrant center of OC life"; how wíll this
work? where are studies of similar projects in similar cities? does this mean more
office towers in the area, and the loss of more historic properties?)
provide "substantial positive fiscal impact" (where are the facts and figures? the
fiscal analysis I have seen is lacking in substance and detail)
bolster economic health by aiding in re-establishment of businesses in the area and
attracting private investment (again, studies? analysis? how will this happen?)
guide development toward preserving aesthetics and "cultural qualities" of the City to
make it a source of pride (not sure what this consists of and how pride wíll be
measured)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Why, for this particular project, has the well thought out Mid-Town Specific Plan been
gutted? This plan was formulated by residents and City staff in 1996, and presents a true
vision of the Mid-Town area-not the fantasy world where this huge monument wíll cure
all of Santa Ana's ílls. Nothing I have heard or read from the developer or the City has
shown that the minuses of this project are heavily outweighed by the plusses. In fact, it is
impossible to pin down any real information on the supposed plusses.
Please look carefully at the facts and think what Mid-Town Santa Ana wíll be like "post-
OBP", when the wishful thinking of this project's supporters turns out to be baseless.
This is too big a gamble. Please do not allow this project to move ahead. Your
constituents wíll be grateful that you considered the facts and protected our city from a
future nightmare.
~
Alison Young
1102 S. Ross St.
Santa Ana, CA 92707
~.
75E-70
8
8
8
588 S. Shasta Way
Orange, CA 92869-5242
April 18,2004
,
Ffc
¡"f «, F'! i'1ì,T
¡ L ~d i . i UY
Clerk of the Council
20 civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701-4058
To Whom it May Concern:
My name is Charlotte Aber and I am a student at the Orange
County High School of the Arts in Santa Ana. I agree with a
large number of people in the community who feel that con-
structing a 37 story building in downtown Santa Ana is a bad
idea. Why does the council feel that Santa Ana requires a sky-
scraper to bring it "prestige"? Santa Ana is a beautiful city
already; and a structure that is quite a bit taller than most
of the buildings here would look very out of place. Old Town
Orange is considered unique because the buildings were built
100 years ago. There are several old buildings in the area
that could be restored to accommodate new businesses.
This new building would create a multitude of problems includ-
ing an increase in already hectic traffic, an increase of wear
and tear on the roads themselves, the current infrastructure
will be unable to support the needs represented by the build-
ing, 37 stories worth of extra sewage and trash, and a need for
more parking space.
This parking issue could cause problems specifically for the
Orange County High School of the Arts. It could cut out a
piece, or all, of their senior and volunteer parking. The
attending students give back to the community quite frequently
through the purchase of food and merchandise from the local
businesses, as well as with many service hours.
75E-71
Also there is the fact that it far exceeds the existing height
limits for a building in the surrounding area. On top of that,
there are enough empty commercial buildings without 37 more
stories worth, as demonstrated by an article in the Orange
County Business Journal that states "...the leasing activity
continues to lag, with landlords holding a growing stock of
idle buildings."(padilla) As a matter of fact Lee & Associates
Commercial Real Estate has reported a negative net absorption
of 953,331 square feet in Central County. The largest amount
of empty space in the entire county. It is true that this
building could bring a tidy sum if enough space was rented out,
but there may not be much demand for additional law space
(Padilla) .
I imagine that one of the reasons the council approved the
building is to help boost the economy in the area.
unfortunately, if there isn't much space rented out then there
won't be many people coming here, which probably won't affect
the economy much. Another reason for the approval could be
property tax: more taxes would be good for the city. Yet if
the tax on this building is as high as anticipated, the rent
would be too expensive for plenty of companies. Of course,
there is also the fact that bringing people to downtown Santa
Ana could be good. Although if people are coming down here to
go to the restaurant they are unlikely to make purchases from
the small, local businesses. Just out of curiosity, who would
want to come all the way downtown for dinner?
I hope that this letter has caused you to give a bit more
thought to the issue at hand. Some feel that this building is
a beneficial project; others a monstrosity-to-be. A building
full to the brim with Fortune 500 companies and law firms with
a amazing 4 star French restaurant atop all? The true question
is: Do we really need it or is it just to give Mike Harrah
something else to stick his name on?
Sincerely yours,
Charlotte Aber
Orange County High School of the Arts student
75E-72
8
8
8
SARAH P. BROWN
705 West Jonquil Road
Santa Ana, CA 92706
June 21, 2004
JUN ZJ
9 30 AM '04
The Honorable Miguel Pulido
. Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
GL L i
CITY 0¡ ::'ii\¡<¡ ~j., :;'1(11
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Dear Mayor Pulido:
I am a concerned Santa Ana resident, and am writing this letter to protest the build/development
of this 37 story building plus 7 story parking structure covering the area between Broadway,
Sycamore, Tenth and Washington Streets.
The Mid Town Specific Plan, which the Council approved in 1996, specifically limited the
development of structures in this area to no more than 3 stories not to exceed 35 feet in height.
This was approved with the intention of preserving the historic Broadway Corridor.
I am opposed to this project and ask that you vote against One Broadway Plaza. Here are
some of my concerns:
Affect on Broadwav Corridor Properties - I understand that at least three historic properties
along the Corridor would be destroyed or relocated. There goes our cultural and historical
heritage to say nothing of the impact on those historical properties surrounding them.
Affect on Traffic/Conaestion - Should the project be approved it has been estimated that there
will be 6000 vehicle trips per day. This will not only lead to severe congestion in and general
access to the downtown area, but will also overburden freeway on ramps and off ramps leading
to downtown.
Affect on Area Schools - Specifically, the Orange County High School of the Performing Arts, in
the vicinity of the project, would certainly be adversely impacted.
Affect on Residential Neiahborhoods - Who wants a looming monolith of this proportion casting
a shadow over his/her home and backyard? No one. And after construction of this project, who
knows what further development and destruction of existing properties would follow in the wake
of Broadway One.
I urge you to vote against approval of the One Broadway Plaza Project.
sin7' r,el,t,
.j .//
L/ I, /)~
,rV'/
SARAH P. BROWN
co: Councilman Brett Franklin
75E-73
705 W. Jonquil Road
Sæta Ana, CA 92706
(-z::::::-;3,~'\
,-.... C ,i_' I..~. .\
~~'~ 1;.! ~ : '\
'" ::: ".;1
" 2:~' /
...-~~.#'/
Honorable Miguel Pulido
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
--~..,.,.......-._- ,~
-- ~.-- .....
-_....,..~.,-'---,.
._~., .-,."",, /' ~"'..-.., '.
......".,...,".:~ ,°' ,. ~.. ~_.,_._~. .
:.::::-:./ ~.~.., :
"'~'--'''' ,~ .",
~
I'-
.
W
It)
I'-
"327Cii +4Ci{f.
11,1,," 1111,1,1111'" II II, \,.111",1," i .1\'li 11111. i II ,II III
<.
~
I
~
8 ,~
To: CrC/,wth? .ß1r I~ btVL cc~ b-I O~CJ if
F,om, Sk ¡'''AI CaJe) cf..o." ^I F = d <Sf, <-"II- 7' J.- 70 /
Subject: ~ßr7--t?t?< ~ t~ '
de?1/? 4, G~ccÀ
/
;47 tJ-- C¿?y¡~£, V- ¿''^j -h~ ~~J-l~
~f( (':<7~)) ftVv1t~ (7ÞV<-4) . 1J0~~
f-~ ftVv/< ~c -t- f>Æ4 ¡J~ ~
f1/W~ C¿uJ î ~ 7/;'Ut f 1 ~~ ,
8h~ M~ ~~ ìt-r r£ 1#Urv1
fr-cvþ flt01 i-D cJffh1/ ¿ rJJ¿c~f ~d d--<l
~ ~~!Ydy.
1: h~v&( ÞJ1'v'vf-e '/(J! ~~r --Iv &+eaÁc ¡v~f?{
r ~--h-j-C-f' rn ~ ~, .~ ~/;-eVé'
~ ~ir¿ Jfv¿ ~1~ 'f #-vf ~ -/0 ~
YN ~ erg ~(-fp: kl/~L¥~ ~
vofMJ !if {/71 :;(lW ~ Ie vt.
~ l(/t1- V11+'j~ ~r Cðr!~) jf'~
~f:J- r¡ ;tfvz 4¿~~4 ~ /-I:c0if~/~ 0'
:ckfi .~ 'iff ({/Úa- ~ h~ Q~L~ cg
.1ft Ä ~ Þ~vZk~ ~+/ieo¿5 0
,,/.;"~~ ~~) &'1}5gc¡. ;&d }rub,
i. . -75 c5''J0~ C"1~
MEMORANDUM
r.tð"
Lawrence, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lawrence, Mark ' ;,
Monday, June 21, 2004 3:25 PM j
'Joe and Kim Gerda"
RE: One Broadway Plaza - Pedestrian Safaty problems for OCHSA students
,
,
t
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Gerda,
On behalf of the Mayor and City Council, thank you for your letter regarding the proposed
One Broadway development. A copy of your letter has been forwarded to each of them for
their review. The Mayor and City Council appreciates you both taking time to share your
thoughts regarding this matter and assure you that your comments wil1 receive their
fullest consideration.
Should you have any further comments, please call me at (714) 647-5200.
Mark Lawrence
Assistant to the City
City of Santa Ana
Manager
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe and Kim Gerda [mailto:paynegerda@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 9:15 PM
To: cgastelo@sausd.k12.ca.us; Ross, Jim; Bott, Daniel; Garcia, Mike; Franklin, Brett;
Bist, Lisa; Solorio, Jose; Alvarez, Claudia; Christy, Alberta; Pulido, Miguel;
amijares@sausd.k12.ca.us; ayamagat@mtsac.edu; jpalacio@pacbell.net; vrrichardson@msn.com;
Kids4sal@hotmail.com; ocyouth@juno.com; assmblymncorrea@aol.com¡ senator.dunn@sen.ca.gov¡
loretta@mail.house.gov¡ margaretbrown@sausd.k12.ca.us
Cc: paynegerda@mac.com
Subject: One Broadway Plaza - Pedestrian Safety problems for OCHSA students
J
One Broadway Plaza - pedestrian Safety problems for
OCHSA students
Dear City Council members, SAUSD School Board members,
SAUSD Superintendent, City Public Works, Assembly
member Lou Correa, State Senator Joe Dunn, and
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez,
I fear a car will hit an OCHSA student crossing the
street if lOth Street is re-opened. It is well known
that the City of Santa Ana has the highest pedestrian
fatality in Orange County. Protecting the safety of
our youth must becom~_;~ higher priority.
My child attends Orange County High School of the
Arts. On July 6 the City of Santa Ana is planning to
re-open 10th Street as part of the plan for One
Broadway Plaza. This would be dangerous since OCHSA
students must cross lOth Street during their school
day. Also, the proposed drop-off/pick-up arrangement
will require even more students to cross lOth Street.
On top of that, thousands of cars from One Broadway
Plaza will be traveling this portion of the road if
re-opened (*see attached site plan) .
One of the main reasons loth Street was closed was to
ensure student safety in compliance with Vehicle
Code**. Students at OCHSA must cross lÒth Street
during their school day. This is one of the main
reasons it was closed.
Mr. Harrah has brought it to our attention that
1
75E-16
Assembly Member Lou Correa, State Senator Joe Dunn,
and Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez endorse his proposed
One Broadway Plaza. please do not endorse this
~roject without making sure pedestrian safety is ;
.nsured. . <:
For the sake of our children, please take steps to
ensure that 10th Street remains closed. Given that;
the City Council plans to decide on the matter at th~
July 6 Council meeting, I ask you to act quickly to '
ensure student safety. '
Sincerely,
Kim Gerda
OCHSA Parent
* See attached map (file) drafted based on
information provided by City documents last week.
** Vehicle Code 21102. Local authorities may adopt
rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution
closing to vehicular traffic that portion of any
street or highway crossing or dividing any school
ground or grounds when in the opinion of the
legislative body having jurisdiction such closing is
necessary for the protection of persons attending such
school or school grounds.
See:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/dll/vC21102.htm
8
..°_-.
8
2
75E-77
J
Page 1 of 1
f'~
Lawrence, Mark
-. -"- - - -- .----.---..- -
From: Lawrence, Mark
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 2:58 PM
To: 'BluePorsche40@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Broadway Tower by OCHSA
Dear Rene Morales,
On behalf of Council Members Christy. Alvarez. Solorio, and Sist, thank you for your letter regarding the
proposed One Broadway development. A copy of your letter has been forwarded to each of these council
members for their review. The City Council appreciates you taking time to share your thoughts regarding this
matter and assure you that your comments will receive their fullest consideration.
Should you have any further comments, please call me at (714) 647-5200.
Mark Lawrence
Assistant to the City Manager
City of Santa Ana
-----Original Message-----
From: BluePorsche40@aol.com [mailto:BluePorsche40@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 12:32 PM
To: mikegarcia@cisanta-ana.ca.us
Subject: Broadway Tower by OCHSA
J
Dear Sirs and Madames,
I am writing to you about my concerns for the Broadway Tower project and the safety of our children
during and after construction.
I moved from Northern California so that my daughter could fInish high school at the Orange County
School of the Arts. She attended the San Francisco School of the Arts her freshman year, and we were very
disapointed with not only the arts program, but the safety and security of the school, as it is an open campus. I am
so pleased with OCHSA in comparison--closed campus, many adults providing constant security throughout the
day--from the drop-off in the morning, to monitoring during lunch, and after school.
The block that OCHSA sits on can be a very busy area already--Main Street is of course, a main
thoroughfare, and Sycamore and the closed-to-traffic lOth streets are our only saviors. Sycamore provides a safe
drop off and pick up spot for our children. Even it is very busy when school lets out. The closure of lOth street
to traffic allows the children to freely cross to the lawn at Symphony Hall for lunch, and for meetings and
performances. If this is reopened to traffic, and the Sycamore drop-off area is eliminated, the safety of our
children would be extremely compromised.
Please take.~ moment and drive the blocks surrounding our school. Even though school is out, you can
picture 1200 children arriving and departing, and imaginc thc danger and confusion if the street changes are
approved as proposed. And remember, the high school students get out of school at 4:55 pm--just as many people
will be leaving work!!
Thank you for taking the time to review this--this great school deserves to remain a safe and secure place
for our 7th-12th graders. I would hate for people such as myself to pass up the opportunity for their children to
attend this wonderful school because of the traffic situation.
Most sincerely,
Rene Morales
6/21/2004
75E-78
Christensen. An!¡li
~om:
nt:
0:
Subject:
BluePorsche40@aol.com
Sunday, June 20,200412:34 PM
Bist, Lisa; Solorio, Jose; Alvarez, Claudia; Christy, Alberta
Fwd: Broadway Tower by OCHSA
B]
3roadway Tower by
OCHSA
8
8
1
75E-79
Page 1 of 1
PaT'
Lawrence, Mark
From: Lawrence, Mark
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:33 PM
To: 'WendMark@aol.com'
Subject: RE: New building on Main St.
Dear Mr. Ciarrocchi,
On behalf of the Mayor and City Council, thank you for your letter regarding the
proposed One Broadway development. A copy of your letter has been forwarded to
each of them for their review. The Mayor and City Council appreciates you taking
time to share your thoughts regarding this matter and assure you that your
comments will receive their ful1est consideration.
Should you have any further comments, please calI me at (714) 647-5200.
Mark Lawrence
Assistant to the City Manager
City of Santa Ana
-----Original Message-----
From: WendMark@aol.com [mailto:WendMark@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 20049:01 PM
To: Garcia, Mike
Cc: Bist, Lisa; Solorio, Jose; Alvarez, Claudia; Christy, Alberta
Subject: New building on Main St.
Dear Council Member,
My name is Mark Ciarrocchi. My son will be starting seventh grade at OCHSA in the
fall. He obviously has several years ahead of him attending a great educational
facility in your fine city. It was difficult to make the leap from traditional school
building to converted office building for our child's middle and high school education.
Now we're told that there's a plan under way to build a 37 story office tower next to
OCHSA. That has to, by extrapolation, increase the traffic logarithmically around the
school. Also, I understand that 10th street will be re-opened to vehicle traffic, adding
multiple layers of safety, noise, and pollution concerns to the situation.
'.;,-
If I have been misinformed please let me know. If I have not, please reconsider
voting for this plan. The health and safety of hundreds of children are at risk. If you
are a parent. please take a moment and consider what this would mean to you if it
were your child's future at stake.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Mark Ciarrocchi
(714)745-2497
6/21/2004
75E-80
./->r'
i "'.' ,., .n
I "'-
~ ..J
.)
8
Mayor Miguel Pulido
And members of the
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana CA 92702
~,- ".
.~! !~ð
'OL;
('II'. .
'"\'1i-.'
Dear Mayor Pulido and members of the City Council;
I recently learned that on Tuesday, July 6 Council will vote on the proposed One
Broadway Plaza. I also learned that, among other problems, construction of this
37-story structure provides for the re-opening of Tenth between Main Street and
Sycamore. It is also my understanding that this street could now be subject to use
by thousands of cars each day.
8
My child is a student at Orange County High School of the Arts and must cross
that section of Tenth Street several times every day. Further, Tenth Street is the
only open space currently available to OCHSA students during the day. I am
writing to express my concern for the imminent danger to the safety of OCHSA
students if Tenth Street is re-opened and to ask that you instead move to abandon
Tenth Street to OCHSA.
As the council noted in Resolution Number 2000-059, the closure of Tenth Street
is necessary to protect the students attending OCHSA. This resolution was passed
when only a few hundred cars used Tenth Street each day. Opening Tenth Street
for use by thousands of cars every day, with no more protection for students than a
crosswalk, endangers OCHSA students, including my child. It is clear that there is
a high probability that an OCHSA student will be injured or killed if this street is
reopened for this project. In resolution 2000-059, you found:
(1) Tenth Street is not necessary to provide access to abutting property;
(2) Tenth Street divides the OCHSA campus; and
(3) Closing Tenth Street is necessary to protect the students.
8
All three ofthose factors remain true today. Tenth Street is not necessary to
provide access to the abutting property, even with the proposed One Broadway
Plaza project. It is merely a convenience for the project. Access is available on
other streets. Tenth Street still divides the school and closing Tenth Street remains
necessary to protect students. In fact, OCHSA has grown considerably since the
time of that resolution. The risk now is even greater than it was in 2000. It is clear
that OCHSA is succeeding and is here to stay. Therefore, the City should not only
75E-81
leave Tenth Street closed, the street should be abandoned so that the school can
use it for much needed open space. This should be done regardless of whether the
project is approved or rejected.
At a meeting with OCHSA parents on June 15, 2004, Mike Harrah, the developer
of the project, stated that student safety has always been a high priority. Mr.
Harrah acknowledged that he believes that opening Tenth Street is not essential to
his project. He stated that leaving Tenth Street closed could be done. After
listening to all of the parent's concerns that opening Tenth Street would create a
dangerous situation for OCHSA students. Mr. Harrah promised to contact the City
immediately and request the abandonment of Tenth Street to OCSHA, rather than
reopening Tenth Street as part ofthe project. I am writing to request that you
support this request and make the abandonment of Tenth Street to OCHSA a staff
priority and a required part of the project.
I understand that this is late in the approval process; however, OCSHA parents
were not made fully aware of the details of this project until this meeting on June
IS-two days before school is over for the year. Even if you have to postpone a
decision on this project to re-evaluate the impact of the abandonment of Tenth
Street, a slight delay is insignificant in comparison to protecting the child or
children who are likely to be injured or killed if Tenth Street is reopened. I want to
remind you that no amount of money is worth risking the life of a single child.
Further, as an elected public servant, your first duty is to the people of the City,
especially to the children. Economic considerations must come after safety.
Please support the developer's request for abandonment of Tenth Street and keep
our children safe. Please ensure that his letter is forwarded to the persons within
the City necessary to address this issue.
Very truly yours,
c5d ¥¿;=~~
Signature
The parent/parents of an OCHSA student. - ~
. C 0:<.zml tj¿' 8>-pIY7OLC,-",)
75E-82
~ ~~
~]~~:~~~
I..,.,r~ ~
I.d ) ~
¡:t.' '~
::;: ~ C'-. \X'"
g.tJ '^~~~
~~ ~
8
8
-
-
-
-
.-
-
-
-
-
-
8
75E-83
II
(I)"'=::
§ ~='
;-~r.n
>¡;i!:æ.
= 1"'<
l' 5'~
n~o
>="
\Q=t"\
Nc::.';
..... (1)-'
QI"'"=
'" e
, N
'" þo
\Q
'"
Q
~C>'ii'
".¡
ì., r-.) ,,~.
..; u ':,...
) .-
(-._, <-. ""1:: 0'
0.-'-.' ¡....>
y' ~~; 3: Î'\
\ ~- ....,"'
"~'!i"~'/
,~
. .
¡ ~ (1
~ ¡ ~~ ~"d
., I .." ~
> I ~.~~,.-...;:.I
~ ...~~: t1J
! r ~i:- ~~
; ,." hi
i ;~ ~
'..r......'-.~ .--G
[,I"; ,. ~
, .
I,
\:
Ii
'~, ,
. !,..
Honorable Miguel Pulido
Mayor of Santa Ana
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Drive
Santa Ana, CA 9270 I
Dear Mayor Pulido:
My name is Linda Mendoza, I am currently a !Teshman at Orange County High School of the Arts. I am
writing to you regarding my concern about the thirty-seven story building proposed to be built behind our
school on Broadway. I am opposed to this proposed to build a thirty seven story building for many reasons.
The traffic and noise of the students and city employees is hOITendous. I think this building will disrupt the
education ofOCHSA students.
OCHSA is situated in one of the most congested areas in Santa Ana. There is a population of about 1200
students here at OCHSA. It will continue to expand each school year. After school there are a lot of cars
which endanger students who are crossing the street. I also heard that Tenth Street will be reopened. An
important question is where will the buses park and unload/load on/off OCHSA students? This can cause
more traffic congestion.
Four years ago Santa Ana asked OCHSA to move to Santa Ana !Tom Los Alamitos. However, a thirty-
seven story building next to OCHSA will increase traffic around OCSHA. This seems to say that OCHSA is
not very important to the city. Santa Ana has been building a reputation as a city which endorses the arts.
OCHSA has brought name recognition to Santa Ana.
Noise is the second problem that will occur with construction. All of the students here at OCHSA take
conservatories. For example: Music and Theatre students need quiet sUIToundmgs in order to hear their
instructors instruct them and to hear themselves act or sing, Commercial Dance also needs to hear their
music and their instructors as well. It is essential for Instrumental Music students to have quiet surroundings
to perfonn. Noise will continue to amplifY with more business around the school.
The city has not yet told OCHSA how much time and years it may take to have this building completed. If
the city votes to construct this building, how long will it take? If construction takes place, this will continue
to disrupt activities at OCHSA. The construction of this building may suggest that OCHSA is no longer a
priority to Santa Ana, and perhaps the arts in Santa Anan will no longer important.
Mayor Pulido, Santa Ana's motto says that "Education is first." Which is your priority Mayor Pulido? Is
your priority education or is it business?
Respectfully yours,
Linda C. Mendoza
75E-84
8
8
8
Kathya Torrejon
2568 Falconer Way
Orange, CA 92867
April 15, 2004
Mayor Miguel Pulido
City of Santa Ana
20 ûivic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Dear Mayor Migue1 Pulido:
I would. like to thank you in advance for taking the time to read my letter. My name is
Kathya Torrejon. I am 15 years old and a student at OraRge County High School of the
Arts. It has recently come to my attention that a 37 story building is going to be built on
Broadway Street in Santa Ana. I am concerned about many problems that would arise if
it's built. If this building is constructed, there will be many ICIng-term effects, not only for
OCHSA, but also for the city of Santa Ana.
During the construction ofthe building, many things would be lost. When finished, it
would consist of over 500,000 square feet of office, retail, and restaurant areas. It would
be 37 stories which would not oaly make it the tallest building in Santa Ana, but in all of
Orange County. If the building is constructed ion this area, three historical buildings would
have to be removed. Along with those buildings, the removal of the Yale Apartments and
nearby residential dwellings might also occur. Finally, many streets would be blocked
due to construction.
One of the biggest reasons to. not construct this building would be because of the increase
of traffic. There would b many streets that would have to close during the construction
period. As a result of this, there would be more cars on the nearby streets and many
detours. The detours would cause an impact on the city because the nearby streets like
Sycamore, Tenth, and Washington St. are already crowded as it is. Another reason would
be that the construction would be very disruptive to the school's learning. When there is
too much noise, students can't hear very well. That's how it will be when all the
machines are outside working for years. Along with making a great deal of noise, it will
make the air quality around the area very poor. This wouldn't be good for air
conditioning and for lunch time when many students are outside. Lastly, the construction
will take place where the OCHSA parking currently is. Because of this studeHts will not
have any place to park. This would really affect OCHSA and the traffic would really
affect the entire city.
Now I can understand why you would want this tower to be built. Santa Ana is in need of
more office space and jobs. This buitding would really help in offering jobs but why can't
it be built somewhere else? Somewhere-where it won't remove three historical buildings,
75E-85
cause too much traffic, and disrupt the learning of high school students? Also, the
school's parking would be gone. It has been said that there would be separate parking and
underground parking would be available to OCHSA students when the building is
finished. The problem with that is that it will take years to construct so it won't be
available for a long time. The separate parking would work, except it is somewhat far
fÌ'om the school. So it will take much longer for all the students to get to school. As a
final point, it's true that the area is a large are of space with not many modern buildings.
But it does have histoòcal buildings tha~ are important to- Santa Ana. Along with those
buildings, there are residencies and Yale apartments that if removed, would cause the
OWRers to have to move and find a new residence. There are many other spaces in Santa
Ana that can be used for building office space that doesn't require the removal.ofhomes
or apartments.
If this 37 story building is constructed, it will cause many changes. These changes
include traffic, parking problems, and disruption oflearning. Since it is so large,
construction will carry on for many years and all of these 'tiisturbances will continue untit
then. I ask you to take into consideration all of this information so we could find a better
solution and find somewhere else tò construct it or not construct it at all. Just think of all
he things that wouldn't be lost. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, 'Vy-'o,
:m~O 'JmjiYf\)
Kathya Torrejon
75E-86
8
8
8
JOY MASON-JOHNSON, M.D., INC.
/ "J \,:'
v.., (' ð
(,~¡.......,.A ./ i'
DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF RADIOLOGY
DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF NUCLEAR MI£f!fCII'(!,
1603 NORTH BROADWAY' SANTA ANA, CA 92706
(714) 542-3597
"/ '1-. 1 j: !
~ i,C' ~¡ dLt
,I
,.1,.
March 19, 2004
Mayor and City Council of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Re:
One Broadway Plaza
Although I am quite certain my concern has been previously addressed by the planning
commission, I do recall reading that the project would cause an additional 4,000 to 6,000 cars per
day on Broadway, This causes me considerable distress because of my fear that an additional
traffic load of this magnitude will severely burden the existing routes to the Civic Center and
make turning into the existing businesses on Broadway virtually impossible. Also, the way the
left hand turn lane is structured at the comer of Broadway and Seventeenth Streets, only 12 cars
can pass through that intersection every two minutes, which means only 360 cars can pass per
hour through the intersection, turning left. If the traffic load that will be generated for Broadway
is an additional 400 to 600 cars per hour, this means that the wait time to turn left on Broadway
could be in the range of 30 to 40 minutes. This could create incredible congestion on
Seventeenth Street. North Broadway and North Main already move very slowly during rush
hour and the possibility of severe traffic jams along Broadway, Flower, Main and Seventeenth
Street becomes a problem of real significance.
My question is, how is the traffic flow going to be directed to accommodate all the new users
and what assurances do the current property owners on Broadway have that during construction,
they will be able to access their property, as well as move fteely along the corridor?
While I welcome the idea of a wonderful new high-rise bringing a whole different class of
professionals, as well as retail consumers to Santa Ana downtown, I am very concerned by the
possibilities for creating traffic flow problems of a catastrophic nature. The possibility that one
building could create a situation in which the whole civic center area becomes a virtual parking
lot, and every business in the area suffers, causes me great alann.
Would you please address my concerns and let me know what plans the city has evolved to
prevent lengthy traffic jams and ensure that current business owners will have access to their
own individual parking areas? Thank you very much.
JMJ:ldj
~D,mc
75E-87
APR-01-2004 11:21 PM
" ."
ØBROA.o~
~ ~ "I;.
BULLDOGS
120 Civic Co""" D.... Wüt Scon'" Ana, CA 92701'75ó~
171~) 547.9'.5
April 1,2004
Mr, Mike Garcia
Council Member -Ward 6
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
RE: Non-Returned Telephone Calls
Dear Mr. Garcia:
J hope all is well with you and that your delay in responding to my telephone calls of March 25
Me! March 29. to your office at City Hall, are explainable.
Since the conventional manner of returning telephone calls appears to be problematic, I've
decided to submit my request in writing so that there is no misunderstanding.
r would like to $peak with you regarding the One Broadway pli1Z8. (OBP) Ad Hoc Committee. It
has be!!n over two weeka ainee Council vote<:l to create this committee and I'm seeking clarity
on the progreu and work of the committee. My concerns and questions are:
.
What is the meeting schedule of the ad hoc committee?
Who is chairperson of the OB" Ad Hoc Committee?
Who are the participating members of the ad hoc committee~
What are the guideUnea regarding the public's participation in the ad hoc committee?
.
.
.
r welcome the oppoTtunity to talk with rcglJding my concerns about the OSP Ad Hoc
Committee and I'm hopeful we will talk before Friday. Apri12. I may ~ contacted at 541-3449.
Sincerely.
(' ~1t~VZltl fM 1'~
g- Ann Ramirez: I
"lww.broodwarbulldog..<om
75E-88
8
8
8
-------.---------
----------.
GARY & JULIE HUMPHREYS
2112 N. Ross Street
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(714) 541-3452
April 22, 2004
Honorable Miguel Pulido
Mayor
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92701
Re: One Broadway Plaza
Dear Mayor Pulido:
I recently learned that you have chosen to abstain from voting on the One Broadway Plaza
project because of your past connection with the developer. While this may have been a difficult
decision for you, it is nevertheless duly noted by your constituents and is commendable.
I wanted to take the opportunity to thank you for placing your ethical obligations above
, any personal feelings you may have in this matter. It is regrettable that your fellow council
member, Claudia Alvarez ot follow the example you have set.
JPH:bm
75E-89
~jr~4¡~~~4 l~:l~
~lj-4I:1j-1:I1:I4{
LA/UG I:ILV~. I~AU~~
"r-' :¡¡
¡'j;',:" U
8 51¡ Aií 'Oq
Santa Ana City Counc:il
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CalifoIIÚa 92702
Ci . ¡
; i A .A ~i.t..
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Honorable Mayor and Council Merobel'3:
À.ß a resident or Santa Ana. I am very excited to hear about the proposed One Broadway
Pm project. This project is essential for the city in many ways. Not only will One
Broadway Plaza be an Icon. Landmark for the city, but also will provide economic
growth, which is desperately needed, for future 8UCCCSS of Santa Ana. One Broadway
Pm wilJ give the City olSanta Ana the recognition as a cultural hub for Oranic
County. This project will change the outside perception of Santa Ana and wiJI gain the
pride and respeer as the Capitol City of Orange County, encoW'aging professional offices
to relocate their headquarters to our downtown.
One Broadway Plaza's urban setting and location is ideal for the City of Santa Ana. So
many times, developers build on the outside edges orthe city, which kills our downtown
areas. Having a Class A office building in the heart of Santa Ana will bring back life to
the DowntoWtllMidtown areas. I appreciate the attention the developer has given in
successfully weaving the historic past of Santa Ana with the future, providing urb~
plazas and gathering areas for tbe residents.
I atn-lOO% supportive of this project and encourage: 100% support, for the future success
of the city, from the council. Thank you for the opportunity to share my excitement for
One Broadway Plaza and the exciting growth ahead for the City of Santa AAa.
Sincerely,
.-"/ t ---
/,,' " ..~
~'L-~ -
Jf--'~fJ - ~ Vi - fr
75E-90
~A"t:;, ~u~;¿
8
8
8
O~/Oql¿öOq ¡~:!~
¿¡j-'!tjj-tjtjqr
LArU~ ~LU~. I~AU~~
t-'A~t:. ":.u,,,:¿
. ,
...
J 2-2 /,,' ):..
<"... "t.-
v ¡
Santa ADa City CoUDCil
20 Civic Center Plan
Santa Ana, California 92702
'cli, '
c,
. - ,.~, ,-.. ,.."; ;.~' . ~
. "....,
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Honorable Mayor and COWlcil Members:
As 3 resident of Santa Ana. I am very excited to hear about the proposed One Broadway
Plaza project. This project is essentiaJ for the city in many wa)'$. Not only will One
Broadwôty Plaza be an Icon Landmark for the city. but also will provide economic
growth, which is desperately needed, for future ~cess of Santa Ana. One Broadway
Plaza will give the City of Santa Ana the recognition as a cultural hub for Oran¡e
County. This project will change the outside perception of Santa Ana and wÜl gain the:
pride and respect as the Capitol City of Orange: County. encouraging professional offices,
to relocate their headquarters to our downtown.
One Broadway Plaza's urban setting and location is ideal for the City of Santa Ana. So
many times, deve:lopers build on the: outside: edges of the city, which kills our downtown
areaS. Having a Class A office building in the heart of Santa Ana will bring back life to
the Downtown/Midtown areas. I appreciate the attention the developer has given in
successfUlly weaving the historic past of Santa Ana with the future, providing urb~
plazas and gathering areas for the residents,
I iUJI.-IOO<'Io supportive of this project and encourage 100% support, for the future success
of me dty, 1Ì'om the council. Thank you for the opportlmity to share my excitement for
One Broadway Plaza and the exciting growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana.
Sincerely,
áad~'~
187/.2. L/~~ ~
~~/(ÁjfQOÞ--
75E-91
HH 30
8 59M1'O~
Santa Ana. City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 927fYl
;C'.¡ c.
v '--,~..j . , , '. ,--' ); 1... I.
~IlY,:,,¡- ::. .; fA ANA
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
As a resident of Santa Ana, I am very excited to hear about the proposed One Broadway
PIau project This project is essential for the city in many ways. Not only will One
Broad~ay Plaza be an Icon Landmark for the city, but also will provide economic
groWth, which is desperately needed, for future success of Santa Ana. One Broadway
Plaza will give the City of Santa Anathe reçognition as a cultural hub for Orange
County. This project will change the outside perception of Santa Ana and will gain the
pride and respect as the Capitol City of Orange County, encouragmg professional offices
to relocate their headquarters to our downtown.
One Broadway Plaza's urban setting and location is ideal for the City of Santa Ana. So
many funes, developers build on the outside edges of the city, which kills our downtown
areas. Having a Class A office building in the heart of Santa Ana will bring back life to
the DowntownlMidtown areas. I appreciate the attention the developer has given in
successfully weaving the historic past of Santa Ana with the future, providing urbaJ::1
plazas and gathering areas for the residents.
I amJOO% supportive of this project and encourage 100% support, for the future success
of the city, fi:om the council. Thank you for the opportunity to share my excitement for
One Broadway Plaza and the excìting growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana.
hI« ¡€t ò /(1 þ'6¿t 7" d
Sincerely,
75E-92
?-
:~¡~.:- ..
-ro." .~
.' .
P;L"~ hr.,¡'¡,.
"..,~~
~
~ i,.:
.,
., ~
, ~
Dì.'~
8
ONE
'-----.
".' -.-.,.- '-"~"iI
_6__~_Q_6_~~~W ...I;~L~ A Z A
~o,~ ;is
~ç
/
June 23. 2004
Mayor Miguel Pulido and
City Council Members
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92702
Dear Honorable Mayor Pulido and Council members
Enclosed is a packet including several letters from Governmental Representatives and local
Business Associations. Letters from Senator Joseph Dunn, Assemblyman Lou Correa,
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez. The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Boys and Girls Club of
Santa Ana, and other prominent business people of Santa Ana
As you can clearly see, these well educated, successful business people see the importance of
. One Broadway Plaza. These people have come forth, in writing, to support One Broadway
Plaza. They see have the same vision for the prosperous future of Santa Ana as we do, and
encourage you to approve this very important project for Santa Ana.
Santa Ana is the heart of Orange County; One Broadway Plaza will be the landmark building
identifying that heart. It is so important to have a Class A building that will bring back the
professional business to Santa Ana, in doing so, improve the quality of life for all the residents,
improve public perception, and become the Cultural hub for Orange County. With your support,
we all win.
"
1200 North Main Street Suite 900 Santa Ana, California 92701 T 714.543.9484 F 714.543.9972
75E-93
Sun-ZZ-2004 04:21pm
From-Senator Joseph L Dunn
714-705-1586
T-854
POOZlOOZ
HI9
$J\Ç;RJ\MENTO OF~,Ce:
STATE CAPITOL
SAC~AMENTO. CA 9SB!4
TEr.. \9¡6J 445~~a:31
¡""Ax {~16) 323-2323
RJC¡( BATISON
;'-'UC:F OF ~AFF
e:::sTArCT OVI"ICE
t2397 LEWIS SiREEì. SUfTE 10~
CARDI!N GROvE. ~ O:U,WO.4965
TE\. (714) 70=-I:iaO
FAY. ('14) 705.1566
.
COMMITTE:;s: '
CM~ R. aI.JOG~ AND FISCAL.. REvIE'
SU8COMMITTEE ,,4
I3ANXING. COMMERC;E AND
INTERNATtOI'<AL. T/!ACE
C!:NERGY. l1TIUTIES ANa
COMMUNICATION:\:
COVERNMENTAL. ORGANfZAT10N
HOUSINQ ANO COM""IU/It41TY
D¡¡VELOPIY ~f', T
LAQOR 6 It-oOUs-rl"tIAL. RE'-ATrONS
Ve:rI;:RANS AFI'"A:RS
aIalifnrnía ~ta~.e ~.elt(;1!.e
SENATOR~
JOSEPH L. Cl)JNN
THIRTY.FOURTH SENATO~IAL DISTRICT
,
SEJ..¡¡t::r COMMIT'J'I.:ES;
CHAI~. MOI:IIL.~ ANC
MA~UF"ACTUR~D HOMES
CH :\IR. CITIZEN PARTIC::IPATION
JÇiNT COIII\MITT'IL&::
JOINT RuUi:S
June 11,2004
Michael F. Harrah
Caribou Industries, Inc.
1200 N. Main Street, Suite 900
Santa Ana, CA 92701
J
Dear Mike:
I write in support of One Broadway Plaza and your proposal to build in downtown Santa
Ana.
Your project, a new high rise building with ample parking and consideration made to
traffic flow, will provide the needed space for businesses in Santa Ana. Your
commitment to the preservation and beautification of the environment and your
sensitivity to the Santa Ana neighborhoods is to be commended.
I look forward to this exciting project as its completion changes the landscape of Santa
Ana and provides a new unique landmark in one of California's fastest growing business
communities.
Very truly yours,
.". ,-.
L. DUNN
a r, 34!11 District
JLD/ncc
75£.94
- - -. - -,...-
-.~ =-', ......:.~...::o
- . ~ss~;.nhI1L
QIalifarni:x tE~gtsbdurB
COMMITTEES:
CHAIR:
S7AiE CAPITOL
.::.~ :;=::..::::; .-:-- .~~ ~~2..::-.::~-3?
=--: ..:: ~.;.¿ : !~-:J5;:'
=""\~,;;'5 :';:-:169
:3'..:SI:-;:::::::: !.'C ::)=,:=~:: : .':
8
::tISï¡::U:::7 ::>F?!:::E
23::::; NORTH 8R:>ADWAY
30:T= 22:3
SANTA ANA. CA 9270ê
?rl,Jr"E i71 ~.¡ 2S~-0355
FAX (ì14) 285-1301
EMAIL:
assemblymember.com:a@assembly.ca.gov
5:!...::7 :.:)L~;,,¡;~=: :>;\ -~::. ~=';5=
0= -:-~= ::.. T:>::¡O rv1:'=;::~=
C.J:=.?S ~:r: Sï':"71.JÍ\
¡
LOU CORREA
ASSEMBL YMEMBER, SIJ(l"Y.NINTH DISTRICT
VICE-CHAIR:
JOINT LEGISLATIVE SUNS,,7
REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEMBER:
APPROPRIATIONS
BANKING ANO FtNANCE
INSURANCE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT
AND SOCIAL SECURITY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON AIRPORTS
AND THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON CAUFORNIA'S
NURSING SHORTAGE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON MOBllEHOMES
SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEGAN'S LAW
AND SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION
March II, 2004
Mayor Miguel Pulido
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
P. O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, California 92702
CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON
THE CALlFORNIAS
Re:One Broadwav Plaza Proposal
Dear Mayor Pulido,
J
After careful review of the One Broadway Plaza ("OBP") proposal, I have decided to lend my
support to the project. There are several reasons why I have come to that conclusion.
8
First, OBP will bring good paying jobs to Santa Ana. Construction of a 37-story building will
have a significant effect on our local economy. As you know, the construction industry has a
large multiplier effect on the economy, creating two additional jobs elsewhere in the construction
sector and in other parts of the economy. Not only construction jobs, but once built, the h1ilding
will provide jobs for Santa Ana residents as well.
Second, OBP has worked with its neighbors in addressing their concerns. Orange County High
School of the Arts as well as the El Sol Academy are in support ofOBP. Since these schools will
be immediately impacted, it is a testament to the cooperation and thought that has gone into this
project. Traffic is an issued that I trust you will continue to address, not only for the area around
OBP, but for the rest of City of Santa Ana.
Finally, OBP will strengthen Santa Ana's its rightful place as the County seat. One example is
KOCE, the only TV station in Orange County. OBP appears to be the future home ofKOCE.
..;¡.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (714) 285-0355.
~SinCerelY' /
L A
Assemblymember, 691h District
8
r~3.SC visit my hom~pag~ ac: http://democracs.as.c¡embJr.ca.gov/memhcrs/a69/ .-
. pnnZ~a5Þef
LORETTA S,J.NCHEZ
J.6~ O.STRIC':'. C~u~C""''''
SuecC......lrTEU:
ecuCA TtON REFORM
WOAKfORC~ PROTECTIONS
SELeCT e:cuc). TICN
~(JII,.1' po:
~
I....,¡ """':il'O'N(jTO,.. OFFI(;;;:
1 :~o t.ONCWQAT;-t 9Ull=IN~
WASt-4fNGìCN. OC :0515."5.16
I1C2 225-2965
120:" 2:'5-5859 ~A^
COMMITTE: CN
EC;UC" nON "NO THE WCRKFORC"
COMMITTEE ON AAMED SERVIC"S
illnngr£ss af tlrr l¡bt;itrñ §taÌ£s
iSuus£ of i!tep!£s£htatiu£s
. '.
mi15~ingÍIm, 3Q1: 2llS15-IJS41i
0 OIS'I'RIC'~O''''C:2
12397 L!\VIS STREeT. sum; 101
GARCEN CiMOVE. CA 92S4O-4695
17141621.0102
171411321.0401 FAX
www.housa-90v/sanc:h4.l
I.orena@rnad.houu.gov
Su8CO"'M TT~IS:
MIUT ARY RESEARCH ANO CEVe!..OFMENT
MILIT" AAY PE.qSONNEt.
SPEOAL OVERSIGHT PANEL. eN iERRCAISM
June 24, 2002
lY1ichael F. Han-ah, President
Caribou Industries, Inc.
1200 N. Main Street, Suite 900
Santa Ana, California 92701
J
Dear Mr. ~ /J'1tU~
I am writing in support of One Broadway Plaza which you propose to build in historic
downtown Santa Ana.
Santa Ana has experienced tremendous growth during the past ten years, both
commercially and culturally. Because Santa Ana does have many historic neighborhoods filled
. with a rich variety of architectural styles, developers have made it a priority to preserve the
unique character of the neighborhoods. Santa Ana, however, is a very modem city whose ideas
and planning are immersed in the 21" century. The skyline of the city is changing, and like San
Francisco, high rises are jlLxtaposed between Victorians of the early twentieth century.
Personally, I am excited about your new project-a new high rise building with ample
parking for all and, of course, I appreciate your sensitivity to the preservation and beautification
of the enVÌIons. I look forward to this exciting new project being built in Santa Ana, a project
which will certain.ly. provide needed space for commerce in the city. One Broadway Plaza will
be a unique focal point in the ever changing culturally and commercial landscape of Santa Ana.
Best wishes on the successful groundbreaking of your new building.
l~~
Member of Congress
-.--"
LS/nl
;¡,¡¡;.gG..a .
~..
8
8
8
~(
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB
OF SANTA ANA
Members of the City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Dear Members,
Recently I was asked by our long term friend and supporter Mike Harrah at Caribou
Industries, Inc. to provide a letter of support for his new project One Broadway Plaza.
My response was 'Gladly'.
I have always found Mike to be 'a man of vision'. He is tru1y among the first wave of
new Urban Pioneers. \\¡'here others see vacant buildings and blight Mike see's
opportunity and growth.
Mike has invested heavily in Santa Ana-and not just in property. Mike has helped to
create jobs and has shared his gains with nwnerous not for profit organizations.
Having been a tenant in two different Caribou properties I can speak from first hand
experience on how well they were managed. I am sure his newest project One Broadway
Plaza will be well managed, higWy successful and help to create hundreds of new jobs
here in Santa Ana.
Please give your serious consideration to approving the One Broadway Plaza project.
Sincerely,
~~rè~t~r:"
~~.E.O.
Cc. Mike Harrah
950 WEST ;;IGHUND
. .s~~i7A ~;- A, c).. i:7~: .
{ii4j 34:-;212
. ¡:"u ¡7j.J) j'¡:¡-46 jJ
75.E-97'
Sep 08 03 11:24a
HCOC
714 S53 0273
p.2
- ~:
HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
OF ORANGE COUNTY
iYlr. Dan Bolt
Environmental Coordinator
Ciry of Santa Ana
Plaruùng Department
P.O. Box: 1988
Santa Ana, CA 92702
RE: SUPPORT FOR ONE BROADWAY PLAZA
Dear Mr. Bolt:
A
Thank you for the opportunity to lend our 5upport for One Broadway Plaza. The
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Orange County has followed this project for the past
two years and has continued to be impressed by the level of detail and commitment
Caribou Industries has provided to and fQr the community. They truly understand the
need for consensus for such a vital endeavor.
k a regional economic development orgaruzation. we are enthused by the cultural and
economic gro'Nth of the ciry of Santa Ana and would not like to see a slow down of such
positive results. Please support One Broadway Plaza.
Again. thank you, and please do not hesitate to contact our office should you have any
questions or comments.
inCer;ly, ..1
, .J{)~J~
J. el Ayala
resident ..".EO
Cc:
Mayor Pulido
Council Members
....
l:t~.3- ~orth Brmtdw:lY, Suite 305
Santa Ana. CA 92706.16-10
(714) 9534289 F."X (714) ~53'Ö;:73
15~~W
8
8
8
09/0VOJ
THë 09:19 F.~ 9~9 ;21 8910
L\\V OFC FC S.\ì1Œ
.,
'!!:I!~ICO CA=7'~t.Ar~ :iAVF::¡:"
K1i.,'tf M He:-40~rt':ON
TNOM,\.$ .\. ihU\.1.
COUQI..1::: It. INI.IA.', !:
UICUI:.I. G. C:,,uU,I.L.;no
H;'~':'OM iii. ~..H.:.Rõi'10
THOMAS V. ¡:;...~¡¡-
,¡OtIN L.. ctn I.W:ON"
OArll!!\. 11. CAI-H;.'le'..U"7"r1
~AY~ONC e. ~~CWN .
"'ex HW."'tHG
I.F.ON C. SUMMER
OouGI...Io,i .\, GE.33i!LL
.lUNG I. '^"K
"I'01.AI'4i::J^ M. IIiI!OINA
"...",'s ~. l1li"11"",1
JU.a-N C. VICTOA.1A
JfSUS J. rOAR!:!
MARl< S. B;\OWN
LAW OF~IC:::S OFj
FEDERICO CASTEDAN SAYRE
i
900 N. BROADWAY
4'" FLOOR'
SANT.\ ANA. CALIFOR!ÚA '1701
.
,
TE.'-:~l'1aNC (7U) .!:'O.~117
T=l.éPHONe (1)4,1) 7~1-~;f?1
¡'^C¡¡IM I.~ (O-Hl) 131.'911)
I"'AC$IMIL.$ (1 t., S&O-21 ~5
:s.ayr4.,Qaþ Ulyr:::t-J....... ;.om
II ilG~IõU , ,u:mH'~1,1
In U.S. Vlt91" 1,la"d-\
~C^ .\ AZ
""t"IÇ"""O In '-1g:ri¡J;¡ wnlv
RCHAI.O Z. GOM.:, J.O.
elllu A4,"lftlltrlCet
August 28, 2003
J
Mayor Pulido
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Re: One Broadwav Plaza
Honorable Ma.yor and Council Memb~:
~OO~
"'AMANDa F. CM-"VU;
t,JO 'I'Wf. AL.,..r¡aA. :!::UI'rC 10 t
"At'II JC3P'. CA,-¡IIQRNIA 2512C
(.60AI IIrt.n02
S.&:tan &. CU4V;Z ot'I" ~C'
TnoM43 A. -'tH.....
t01" .,TH :5T~=~,,;". :UITI tlO
:J:A.c lt.lt.hll!:no. CALII"O"NI^ tli".
¡;''!f),n'.I!..
KliNT ".. "!tNDIRCGN°
\111)1) .'t. ."o...O""""Y. 1\1t "'..CO'"
'ANT... ANA. CA..I lQCh4.I\ 12701
(7 UJ aO.2117
MIGU''- Q. C.6ftA(,1.IAO'
~7II.1 WfL':W!I=U:;: aLVO., IU'''e \Oot"
LOS "NGI1LI~. e,A.L.IIIOltHJA IIGO(O
(:UI 1I1-~""
OOUO.....o1 II. Irnu,j'f.
7 C.nUl'lçli J:TJUIT
C:WSU:ilTU,~nC.D. ~'T. CIltOU,
V¡ACIH t!LAND!I OOUO
fUGI 173.~322
CH CAw,.,..1
LoU V"a.. QHIGC
MATTHIW Q. C:AIoI,. :¡T~JIII:
CJ.L.t.ISTIR " AI!'f:-tOLOS
II:: t..J.Sõ VIi.(U,S 3L<JO. 'h.
LAS VGa.A.1. NV nUt
11'0:,211-1:142
."'ANACIlCC ATTOANir
As a Business Owner in Santa Ana, I am v~ excited to hear about the proposed One
Broadwa.y Plaza project. This project is essential for the city in many wa.ys. Not only will One
Broadway Plaza be an lcol1 Landmark for the city, but also win provide economic growth, which
is desperately needed, fur future success of Santa.'\na. One Broa.dway Plaza will give the City
of Santa Ana the recognition as a cultural hub for Orange County. This project will change the .
outside pCt'CeptiOtT of Santa Ana and win gain the pride and respect as the Capito! City 0 f' Orange
County, encouraging professional offices to relocate their headquarters to our downtown.
One: Broadway plaza's urban setting and location is ideal for the City of Santa Ana. So
many times. developers build. 011 the outside edges of the city, which kills our downtown areas.
Having a Class A office building in the heart of Santa Ana will bring back life to the
DowntowttfMidtown areas. I appreciate the ;tttention the developer h:1s given in successfully
weaving the historic past of Santa. Ana with the future, providing urban plazas and gathering
areas for the residents.
I am 100% supportive afà1is project and highly encourage 100% (!D.dorse:ne,I:lt, for the
futUre succ~s of the city, from the: council, . ITom our mayor and counC=J. Members, thank you
75E-99 .
- --
Doc\Jment1
09/0~/OJ
THU 09:19 ~tI 949 1Z1 8910
Santa Ana City Council
Re; One Broadway Plaza
8/28/2003
Pa~e 2
L~W OFC FC SAYRE
~OO5
. ,
FEDERICO C, ,~,A YRE
'~ :
.
¡
,
;
,
!
tàr the opparronity to share my excitement for One Broadway Plaza. and the exciting growth
ah~d for the City of Santa. Ana..
FCS/\II1Ilp
,.:,.,
Very truly yours.
LAW OFFICES OF FEDERICO C. SAYRE .
...-::;:¡z.."'-:~"--- i'
,.-;".- - ~"
By: ," .~'-r-.._.~i /" ~'1J"'\..'!
Federico Castelan Sayre: '
Att,pmey at Law
. ~,_.
Ocê~t7'
75E-100
8
8
8
James Matheny
\
1409 Meriday Lane
Santa Ana, CA 92706
.
I
February 20, 2004
To: City of Santa Ana Planning Commission and City Council
I 'wish to add my support to the civic-minded groups and individuals who recognize the
opportunity for growth that One Broadway Plaza wil1 offer..the city of Santa Ana,
The very premise of success is first built on a vision for the future. Since I moved to
Santa Ana in 19421 have seen those with far-reaching dreams build a city where business
thrives and communities prosper and reap the benefits in education and safe
neighborhoods while property values steadily increase.
Santa Ana is known throughcut Southern California for being a model in progress while
preserving it's historical past. One B¡oadway Plaza will continue to meet these ~teria
that make our city rich in yesterday while looking forward totomOITOw.
As a successfu I business owner in Santa Ana for over a quarter of a century, during
which I was a member of the Chamber of Commerce beginning in the 1940's, I ask the
commission and council members to give their full support to One Broadway Plaza.
Sincerely,
~.cK~
James L. Matheny
J.
75E-101
, 02/20/200J 1,: 20 F.U
cl tlbank
¡¡¡¡aoz
..
\
February 20, 2004
Mayor Pulido
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza.
S3I1ta Ana, CA 92702
RE: ONE BROADWAY PLAZA
This letter is in support oillie One Broadway Plaza. Project. & a. resident of this County,
I applaud the efforts of Caribou Industries for their commitmc:nt to the commUDÌty of
Santa Ana. The development of One Broadway PIaza is an exciting vision and we must
all work together to see it happen. As the years have passed.;'Santa Ana has bad
tremendous growth and vita.1.ity. It is my beijefthat such a projeCt would add to this road
of many opportunities for many Santa Ana residents.
I ask that you please consider final. approval so that Santa Ana can continue to flourish.
C=ntly, I am in a position, which cal.1s for my participation with many local agencies
and organizations. I see great potential for all involved and look to your leadership tll
assirt ,¡S in becoming one of the States most attractive County and City.
In closing. please feel free to call me at (714) 493-3262 if you should have any questions.
-Z!~lY.
æ211ac~
Orange County Resident .
Community Volunteer
.,
'1
75E-102
8
8
8
May 07, 2004
Mr. David Ream
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
1- 'l~ ~" 'ß¡\
~11 1
¡ : -~ ',' \ .
"\.L "ì\,~Þ,\{A
v Clì'î Qr ~."..
PO Box 1988
Santa Ana, California
Dear Mr. Ream,
I am a resident of Historic French Park. I want to alert you that the Historic French Park Association, Inc
does not represent all the residents and homeowners of French Park. Historic French Park Association,
Inc is a membership group and a non-profit mutual benefit corporation, within the boundaries of Historic
French Park.
On Sf Sf 04, I attended a meeting for the Historic French Park Association, Inc. At that meeting a decision
was made to send a letter against the One Broadway Plaza Project and to donate $10,000.00 to Santa
Ana Historic Preservation Society for an effort to oppose One Broadway Plaza. A mediator who
represented himself as a Deputy City Attorney, Mr. Mark Savieaney, forced through the decision. Mr.
Savieaney appears to be a friend of members of the Broadway Bulldogs. Also, Mr. Savieaney was
unfamiliar with the Associations bylaws and objectives. Furthermore, the board members who voted for
our Association to send a letter against the project and to donate $10,000.00 of the Association's funds to
oppose the project stated thaI they were members and affiliates of the Broadway Bulldogs and Santa
Ana Historic Preservation Society. These board members are, Debbie McEwen, Jeff Dickman, Ann
Dickman, Steven Cate, Louise Pass, Barry Jensen and Paul Giles.
The meeting held on Sf Sf 04 was not noticed to all the members or neighbors. Furthermore, it was not
noticed that a vote for donating $10,000.00 of Association funds would be made. Therefore, the meeting
did not represent our neighborhood or our membership. I believe that these are important facts that
need to be known and I feel that these board members Debbie McEwen, Jeff Dickman. Ann Dickman,
Steven Cate, Louise Pass, Barry Jensen and Paul Giles of Historic French Park Association. Inc acted
grossly neglect.
In Historic French Park, many residences and myself are in favor of and support the One Broadway
Project.
P/j. I and professional reg.ards,
rY~fiiI~
PatfÍcia Bustamante
819 N. Spurgeon Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701
(714) 836-S003
CC:
Mayor Miguel Pulido
Santa Ana City Council
Santa Ana Planning Commission
Regan Candelario. City of Santa Ana Neighborhood Development
75E-103
.~ ,; t ;:¡:
March 8, 2004
, .
" ..:
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92702
RE: One Broadway Plaza
Honorable Mayor and Council Members;
As a resident of Santa Ana I want to express my support for the proposed One
Broadway Plaza project. Santa Ana needs this project; it will create thousands of good-
paying jobs for Santa Ana residents both during and after construction.
One Broadway Plaza, by encouraging professional offices to relocate their
headquarters to our downtown, will help revitalize the DowntownlMidtown areas. The
developer has produced a well-designed plan that incorporates Santa Ana's historic past
with the needs of its CUITent residents, including spacious plazas and gathering areas.
I encourage the council to move this project forward so we can regain the pride
and respect that Santa Ana, as the Capitol City of Orange County, deserves. Thank you
for this opportunity to share my enthusiasm for One Broadway Plaza and the exciting
growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana.
Sincerely,
¡fly ~
ç~-"Yr'C. '"YZ/
75F-10.4
8-
President
Charlie Miller
Executive
Vice President
John W. Wellen
Senior Vice President
John Jackson
Director, Safety &
Injury Compensation
William Heintz
Director, City Delivery
Kirk Baiz
8
Executive Secretary.
Health Benefits
Representative
Bonnie Lippincott
Treasurer
Barbara Stickler
First Vice President
Kevin McMillan
Second Vice President
David de la 0
Third Vice President
James Henry
Fourth Vice President
Chris Jackson
8
...."
NALC a~ //00
National Association of Letter Carriers
March 12, 2004
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92703
Re: On~ Bro~dwayPlaza:
Honorable Mayor and Council Members
As a representative of many Letter Carrier who live and family
members work in Santa Ana, we are very excited to hear about the proposed
One Broadway Plaza project. We believe that this project is essential for the
city in many ways. Not only will One Broadway Plaza be an Icon
Landmark for the city, but also will provide economic growth, which is
desperately needed, for future success of Santa Ana. One Broadway Plaza
will give the City of Santa Ana the recognition as a cultural hub for Orange
County. This project will change the outside perception of Santa Ana and
gain the pride and respect as the Capital City of Orange County,
encouraging professional offices to relocate their headquarters to our
downtown.
One Broadway Plaza urban setting and location is ideal for the City
of Santa Ana. So many times, developers build on the outside edges ofthe
city, which kills our downtown areas. Having a Class A office building in
the heart of Santa Ana will bring back life to the DowntownlMidtown areas.
I appreciate the attention the developer has given in successfully weaving
the historic past of Santa Ana with the future, providing urban plazas and
gathering areas for residents.
We are 100% supportive of this project and encourage 100% support
for the future success of the city from the council. Thank you for the
opportunity to share my excitement for One Broadway Plaza and the
exciting growth ahead for the City of Santa Ana.
S' I!} /
mcereY7 <, ///8//
.",'éU"ffdL
....-,-
Charlie Miller
President Branch 1100
NALC, AFL-CIO
~
13252 Garden Grove Blvd. Suite 100, Garden Grove. CA 92843-2204
(714)748-1100 FAX (714)750-2365 http://www.nalcbranch1100.org
75E-105
75E-106