City Vote on Tower Is Still a Go

Santa Ana developer Michael Harrah has lost two appeals in his effort to derail a referendum on his controversial 37-story office tower.

“We’ve won on everything,” said Dan Wildish, an attorney representing nearby residents who oppose the project. “This means the referendum will go forward.”

The summary judgments by a panel of three judges in the state 4th District Court of Appeal in San Diego were issued Wednesday and Thursday.

“I hope that at least the voters are getting the idea that we need to proceed with caution on this project,” said Jo Ann Ramirez, a tower opponent who has been fighting the project for four years. “We need really good planning because we have so little [available] land” in Santa Ana, she said.

Voters will decide in the April 5 referendum whether the city should allow the development of One Broadway Plaza, an $86- million office structure proposed for 10th Street and Broadway, near downtown. The tower would be Orange County’s tallest building.

The City Council approved the project in July, but opponents gathered more than 13,000 signatures in a petition drive to force the referendum.

The failed appeals stem from two legal challenges Harrah filed to stop the referendum. In one, he said that if voters overturned the project, the action would violate zoning laws because zoning changes could be made only with a public hearing. In the other challenge, Harrah said signers of the petition calling for the referendum were not provided enough information by opponents to make an informed decision.

Opponents prevailed on a third legal front Thursday in connection with their lawsuit contesting the adequacy of Harrah’s environmental impact report. Harrah’s attorneys had asked Superior Court Judge Jonathan Cannon in Santa Ana to throw out their lawsuit, and he refused.

Cannon did not set a date for a hearing on the environmental report and may wait until after the referendum, when the issue could be moot, Wildish said.

Harrah’s project has been embraced by the City Council as a way to restore the city’s standing as the county’s business seat; it has been criticized by foes because of feared effects on traffic and neighborhood character.