K.1. PC20-1148 Discussion and consideration of the Draft Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP).
RECOMMENDATION: Review and discuss the Draft Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP), accept any public comments, and continue the review and discussion to the August 20, 2020 Planning Commission meeting to allow the public and the Planning Commission additional time to review and comment on the AACAP during the pandemic.
In the effort to support GPAC's recommendation for more restaurants and greater sidewalk activities, then this rendering,
Mobility -- Figure 4.6: Artesia Boulevard Concept without Parking Lane, serves to be the best improvements to the built environment. By removing a parking lane, the City will need to create innovated parking solutions, park-once options and perhaps city owned lots.
Thank you. Wally Marks - property owner 2810 Artesia.
I would like to address some of the vague language and strategies for this revitalization of the Artesia and Aviation Corridor.
1." residential Uses- not allowing for the height requirement due to incapability"
2 Funding Mechanism on page 4.. what are they? because as of right now much of the city's finances are in disarray with the liabilities and litigations of the city council members
3. on Pg 5 there is a large list of words that ultimately sound like empty promises in the strategy to move forward on this project. how can you ensure that those strategies are fulfilled with adequate funding and without another sell off of city bond measures, this is not like other capital outlay projects the city has undertaken, and you are involving much of the business owners that may or may not be willing to move if there is not a hard guarantee.
4. A skate park?.... that is certainly not the most ideal location for such a piece of recreation knowing that it does not optimize the use of space for which you are intended for the Galleria.
5. The list of highest priorities. #7. appendix 6.03 - 10 4.24, and 11, 3.90. These again sound and feel like empty promises as mentioned previously. how do you ensure the funding for these if you do not have them? What measures are you making sure to move forward into being able to acquire those funds, and flesh out these plans, not at the expense of increased taxes or selling off of city bonds?
In the effort to support GPAC's recommendation for more restaurants and greater sidewalk activities, then this rendering,
Mobility -- Figure 4.6: Artesia Boulevard Concept without Parking Lane, serves to be the best improvements to the built environment. By removing a parking lane, the City will need to create innovated parking solutions, park-once options and perhaps city owned lots.
Thank you. Wally Marks - property owner 2810 Artesia.
In reviewing the 177 pages of AACAP,
I would like to address some of the vague language and strategies for this revitalization of the Artesia and Aviation Corridor.
1." residential Uses- not allowing for the height requirement due to incapability"
2 Funding Mechanism on page 4.. what are they? because as of right now much of the city's finances are in disarray with the liabilities and litigations of the city council members
3. on Pg 5 there is a large list of words that ultimately sound like empty promises in the strategy to move forward on this project. how can you ensure that those strategies are fulfilled with adequate funding and without another sell off of city bond measures, this is not like other capital outlay projects the city has undertaken, and you are involving much of the business owners that may or may not be willing to move if there is not a hard guarantee.
4. A skate park?.... that is certainly not the most ideal location for such a piece of recreation knowing that it does not optimize the use of space for which you are intended for the Galleria.
5. The list of highest priorities. #7. appendix 6.03 - 10 4.24, and 11, 3.90. These again sound and feel like empty promises as mentioned previously. how do you ensure the funding for these if you do not have them? What measures are you making sure to move forward into being able to acquire those funds, and flesh out these plans, not at the expense of increased taxes or selling off of city bonds?