Loading...
14 (20)Public Comment From: Rod Pierson < Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 9:57 AM To: Public Comment Subject: Item #14 - Western & Ball Rd. Council Members: Please consider my comments below regarding tonight's public hearing. Thanks! Rod Pierson Sent from Outlook From: Rod Pierson < Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 20212:27 AM To: Jose Diaz <jodiaz@anaheim.net> Subject: Tonight's Zoom - Western & Ball Rd. Dear Councilman Diaz: I appreciate your willingness to meet via zoom this evening with West Anaheim residents to discuss our concerns about the proposed project at Western and Ball Rd. Opinions were expressed - most with strong conviction, and some with extreme frustration. You were patient throughout and handled the exchanges calmly. I do not envy you for being in a position to make a decision that is sure to disappoint one side (residents) or the other (owner/developer). Having spoken with you over the phone during your campaign, I sincerely believe that you deeply care about the City of Anaheim, especially West Anaheim — the neighborhood in which you live and were elected to represent. You obviously spoke and met with many members of the community who also believed in your sincerity enough to vote for you. Please understand that West Anaheim residents are extremely frustrated with the blight, crime, oversaturated and overpopulated apartments, insufficient parking, and homelessness. We have fought (some for decades) to maintain — and yes, even improve our neighborhoods and most feel it has been a losing battle. While we've witnessed decades of favoritism for Anaheim Hills and The Resort District, we've also witnessed a continuing deterioration of our West Anaheim neighborhoods. I attended a city council meeting a few years ago when this was acknowledged by city council members who agreed that it is now our turn to get the attention we deserve. A burst of hope came on the scene when several of us were invited to participate in developing the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. Most of us hoped and even dared to believe that the site at the NE corner of Beach and Lincoln would finally be developed into quality commercial establishments after decades of blight. We were promised there would be no housing on that site and in fact, housing would not be possible due to the complexities and liabilities associated with building housing on a former landfill. About a year later, we were told that not only could housing be built along the Lincoln Ave. portion of that property, but that housing would be required in order to add sufficient "rooftops" for quality commercial establishments to invest in the area. Most of us reluctantly softened our positions on that point, believing that site development would be improved and accelerated by doing so. All the while, we've watched Porto's and the Butterfly Pavilion in Buena Park being built, and the site on the NW corner of Beach and Garden Grove Blvd. in Stanton, being demolished and now almost totally rebuilt (commercial and housing) while we have continued to live with the eyesore vacant site at Beach and Lincoln. Our questions continue to be met with one excuse after another— still nothing — not even attractive signage! Why is it that Buena Park and Stanton can do such a beautiful job with the development of their sections of Beach Blvd., and Anaheim remains stagnant in this area? So, should it be any surprise that West Anaheim residents who truly care about their communities become emotional, frustrated, and even cynical when unappealing and problematic projects are being planned for our neighborhoods? Councilman Diaz, another burst of hope came to us when you were elected as West Anaheim's representative city council member. You conducted a strong campaign, and spoke with many of us in person or by phone. We believed (and still believe) you are our hope in advancing quality and appealing projects, reducing blight, and mitigating problems of overcrowding and overflow parking — all while reducing homelessness in our area. Quite a tall order I understand, but we are all ready, willing, and able to stand with you, while you stand with us. In regards to the subject of the Zoom meeting this evening — the proposed project at Western and Ball Rd: I implore you to encourage the city council to delay the vote on this project. Doing so will provide additional time to seriously consider whether the proposed 11 -unit apartment building with two (tandem) parking spaces for each unit is really the best use for this parcel. While West Anaheim residents would much prefer that this parcel be developed for appealing commercial purposes, we are not unreasonable, and understand the need to be open to having that parcel rezoned for an appealing housing project (preferably single-family homes or condos/townhomes). The West Anaheim resident's concerns with an apartment building (especially an 11 -unit building) for the proposed site came through loud and clear this evening: Overcrowding in apartment units. Due to economic realities of the area - very high rents, and a high number of minimum wage job holders - it is quite common for an excessive number of people to share one apartment. This presents many challenges for the neighborhood, not the least of which is vehicle parking. You responded to this concern by reminding us that the project requires an on-site manager. Is it realistic to expect that this will eliminate the potential problem or even continue into the future after the project has been approved, built, and the current owner/developer are long gone? How could/would this "requirement" be remembered or enforced two, three, or five years down the line? Parking. Most workers in Orange County must have a vehicle to get to their places of work, and most apartments were not designed to accommodate 3 plus parking spaces per unit. This results in overflow of vehicles into surrounding neighborhoods, creating competition with those homeowners for parking spaces and complicating trash pick-ups. Many of the people who park in these overflow neighborhoods are driven to and from their vehicles by friends and family members, creating congestion, litter, noise, and potential altercations with residents. While apartments that were built decades ago may not have been able to for -see this situation, we all know it is a massive problem today. Why would Anaheim continue to approve projects that are sure to exacerbate this problem? When the question was raised as to why the owner/developer wasn't considering single family homes or condos/townhouses, you responded that it was his property and that we could not tell him what to build. Maybe so, but that doesn't mean we have to approve what has been proposed if we do not believe it is in the best interest of the area. If this project is not approved, perhaps the owner will then consider more appropriate and acceptable use(s) for the property. If not, the owner has the option to let the property sit dormant (highly unlikely) or sell to someone who has plans that are more consistent with the needs of the area. What was lacking in this evening's exchange was any strong justification as to why this project should be approved in this area. Is an opinion that the project "looks nice" or that it is better than having an empty parcel, or that we can't tell the owner of the parcel what to build on his property really good enough reasons to approve a project that may very well prove to be problematic in the end? It makes good business sense for property owners and business people to seek to maximize the profit from their projects. If successful they will take their profits and move on, leaving the resulting problems for others to live with. It appears that is what is happening here with an "okay' project and minimal parking provisions. When this is the case, it is the responsibility of local jurisdictions to set standards (and stick to them, without constantly granting variances), and place reasonable limitations on the plans. If we cannot depend upon our elected officials to do this, what hope can we have? I was pleased to hear that you would be willing to survey the subject area in the early morning hours to assess the current situation that was described this evening. I wonder how many planning commission members surveyed, or even visited the area before casting their votes. The same question would apply to city council members. Councilman Diaz, this is your opportunity to demonstrate to the residents of West Anaheim that you are listening to our concerns — they are real and they are significant, and that you really do have our best interests (over a single property owner or developer whose only interests are to make a profit and then leave the area) at heart. Please do the right thing for your constituents, and at least delay the vote to provide adequate time to address the concerns. Respectfully, Rod Pierson Sent from Outlook