Last night I had a chance to find out more about the City of Santa Ana’s proposed Renaissance Plan at the Housing and Redevelopment Commission meeting. Several residents showed up to speak. We all found out that the Plan will ban businesses in the affected area from tearing down and rebuilding their buildings. One speaker even said that if his business is damaged, say by a flood, he won’t be able to restore it if the cost to restore it will exceed the value of the property. That seems a bit harsh.
The plan assumes three people per household, even though national U.S. census figures show that Latinos average 3.54 people per household. The plan also assumes two parking spaces per household, and the planners behind it seem to be trying to force people to walk or use public transit. I think those are fine options, but they are not options available to everyone. Some people have to drive and there is no getting around that.
The plan also talks about getting the mix of businesses in the First Street corridor “right.” I guess the free market couldn’t do that. Isn’t Mayor Miguel Pulido’s muffler shop in that corridor? I wonder if it is “right?”
And city administrators admitted that the plan to build a $15 million per mile street car system that will connect the train station to the downtown area is something they came up with. Even though the OCTA makes money available for transit options the community comes up with. I don’t think that Santa Ana residents have had a chance to share with the City Council what they want in terms of mass transit.
The plan also does not include any affordable housing element. One public speaker told us that other such plans have in fact included that option.
Monday night’s City Council meeting was a Renaissance Plan study session. But the City Council did not televise it. And they met in a small conference room with their backs to the audience. I guess that symbolizes their disdain for the public. George Collins however showed up to film the meeting. You can now see it on his website at this link. Be sure to use Internet Explorer as Firefox has problems with his site.
According to the O.C. Register, “Monday’s meeting of the City Council was the second in as many months held without the usual television cameras broadcasting the discussion on the city’s cable channel. City leaders have said the off-camera but public meetings foster a more open and in-depth conversation about big issues facing the city, such as transportation or development.”
That sure sounds like B.S. to me. When city leaders turn their back on the city’s residents, it cannot be a good thing.
The Register also added that, “The Renaissance Plan calls for a new high-rise district near the train station, thousands of new homes in nearby neighborhoods, and a new emphasis on drawing people into downtown. In many places, it would allow property owners more leeway to develop their land
[The plan also talks about getting the mix of businesses in the First Street corridor “right.” I guess the free market couldn’t do that.]…. said Art above.
He added:
[The plan also does not include any affordable housing element. One public speaker told us that other such plans have in fact included that option.]
Art, the above is an example of what is wrong with your reasoning.
On one hand you believe that a RETAIL BUSINESS is function of the free market and on the other hand you believe that REAL ESTATE BUSINESS is not and must be subsidized by making so called affordable housing.
In your capacity as an Housing Commissioner could you tel us how the affordable housing could be executed over the life span of such housing?
Do you believe that we should have affordable Cars too?
Art, you are so far off on this post for so many reasons!
You are complaining that there is no affordable housing component, but you are complaining about the transit-friendly provisions of the plan. Don’t you think many in affordable housing would probably use transit? You make no sense!
Speaking of transit, you complain about traffic and when a plan for a city, that heavily uses transit, suggests using transit, you rip the plan. Especially when the plan includes areas near a regional transportation center like the Santa Ana train depot.
Just because you would not use a streetcar does not mean nobody else would. Don’t say that the money could go to something else either. Transportation money is usually provided specifically for each type of transportation. Road money can only be used for roads and transit money can only be used for transit. If the city did not apply for the OCTA’s Go-Local program, you would complain that the city was not doing anything to go after more funding for Santa Ana.
There are two sides to a development: the city allowance of a particular type of development and a developer who thinks that the investment will pay off. If a developer is willing to take the risk and it fits within the city, why are you complaining? And the traffic is a mess because many are narrow-minded when it comes to solutions.
As for the First Street Corridor, the plan only covers the north side of the street and the plan does not include a huge parcel between Bush and Minter because of Mayor Pulido and Councilmember Sarmiento. So much for a thorough First Street Corridor plan.
Art, you contribute greatly to the dialog on many city issues. Unfortunately, you fall far short on transportation and development issues.
In a plan where a lot of re-zoning will be taking place, why is the Logan neighborhood, the oldest RESIDENTIAL neighborhood in Santa Ana, going to continue to allow INDUSTRIAL uses? If Residential-Industrial (R/I) zoning was such a great thing, then why doesn’t Floral Park have some R/I zones near the 5 Freeway or Santiago Creek? The City should re-zone the properties in Logan to some sort of mixed-use (residential and light commercial) zoning and work to relocate the existing industrial uses that should have never been located that close to a residential neighborhood. I hope the city will right a wrong that they committed a long time ago.
Art apparently is opposed to affordable transportation, just not affordable housing. Which is it Art, free market or free subsidies?
Whatever your stand on the myriad of issues this project brings up, doesn’t it hold true that the challenges this plan is supposed to address should already be addressed as part of normal city functions? The city government doesn’t know how to act and execute. A Perfect Example of their pathetic approach to city management – The Manning development on Alton… Pludio said in the last council meeting ” I don’t have any control over the school district” and all Clownia had to say was Public Relations Rhetoric to kiss the developers ass. There was no critical thinking or exploration of traffic mitigation alternatives, collaborate with SAUSD don’t cop out that typical government BS answer “that’s not my job, so here’s my rubber stamp approval”. Get with the PROGRAM CITY COUNCIL!
Complain about the cites lack of updating its general plan. And then complain about updating the (one of the parts) general plan.
One thing I would say is the part that was added (east of railroad) is a great place to put a high traffic stadium. Not at a golf course in the middle of residents area. What gives? Do they not have two eye to see the big picture.
Art,
Ace Muffler(Pulido) and Festival Hall(Sarmiento) were drawn out of the Renaissance Plan in an effort to allow the Mayor and Vince to vote on it. There also may be other alterations made to the plan in regards to Michele Martinez. Her property may be too close to the affected area as well.
Yes Art local businesses are very concerned about the effect that the Renaissance Specific Plan will have on their property and business operations. When a city rezones property from industrial (M1 & M2 zone) to residential, they are putting out a big sign that says “go away industrial businesses – we do not want you here and we have no interest in where you go.”
Admittedly, some of the “industrial” uses the city has allowed in this area are obnoxiuos. However, there are many good long time industrial businesses in the plan area which have provided revenues to the city and employment for hundreds of Santa Ana residents.
With some modification of the plan many of these businesses could remain in the RSP area and be compatable with a revitalized city core.
You know that city planners and the city council are plowing this plan forward with as little real input and feedback from Santa Ana M1 & M2 zoned property owners as they can get away with.
However, the city has agreed to meet with concerned RSP industrial business owners in the near future. It is important for concerned residents, employees and business/property owners to be part of the process.
The city identifies much of the industrial area as the “The Rail District.” I hope that RSP M1 & M2 zone employers will not treated as “the railroaded out of town distrct.”
Santa Ana is not short of industrial property. Industrial zoning should have never been imposed on the Logan neighborhood.
#9…Poster #8 is not talking about the Logan neighborhood. There are of other industrial property owners in other areas that are getting “railroaded” by the RSP.
Art:
You’ve had the benefit of studying the RSP and hearing about it in your role as a commissioner and all you can produce is some cursory and shallow comments about the plan.
What good are you as a commissioner if you simply spit out what you read in the OC Register? Take some time to understand the RSP or get off the Redevelopment Commission.
Poster 11,
What’s your point? This post was not meant to be a summary of the Renaissance Plan. It was a brief recap of one meeting.
I am certain that we will be writing additional posts about this Plan in the future. In the meantime, you can look at the Plan online, on the City’s website. The link is in my post. Read it. Make up your own mind.
And if you want to judge me as a Commissioner, by all means please come to one of our meetings. We moved them to 6 p.m. specifically so the public could participate.
And no, I did not merely quote the Register. If you bothered to read my post I wrote about what transpired at the meeting. Honestly, you should ask the Register why their reporters generally run the City’s press releases without questioning their motives. There might be lazier reporters than the ones at the Register, but I doubt it.
Art:
Given that you are getting an insider’s view of the RSP, why don’t you provide your readers some substantive insight into the plan?