"No, we need a family oriented, year round ice rink on that spot. There is too much overdevelopment of high rise buildings going on in this city already."
Oct. 1, 2014 Whitney Scott Bain

"No. This is city owned property. The proposed development will violate our height limit. If our Planning Department and our City Council won't abide by our rules on the property our residents own, then what hope is there for our zoning codes? The Plaza At Santa Monica will be the same mass as Santa Monica Place. We (all of us) own this land. It's in our downtown. Having a hotel bar twelve stories in the sky is not what our residents want or need downtown. We can't afford more office space downtown. Our traffic is already gridlocked. Our downtown is already too dense. All the bells and whistles that the developer is offering as 'community benefits' won't solve the problems that this project will cause.

If our residents want a development at that corner we can build it: four stories, not twelve - a boutique hotel, some apartments, a restaurant, and a movie theatre. And we can keep the ice rink, add underground parking, use one acre for the building and have 1.72 acres for a town square at that corner. It's simple. Let’s do what our Residents want, not a City Council wants that seems to only have two words at their disposal - 'Let's develop.' Those are not words that will inspire our neighborhoods, our residents, or our tourists to love Santa Monica more."
Oct. 1, 2014 Phil Brock

"The project as proposed is 12 stories, not 15. I don’t support a project at 12 stories, nor do I support the amount of new commercial office space proposed.

I do support a shorter project with more affordable housing – especially for service workers who currently work in and commute to downtown – along with less commercial office space.

However I am not in favor of eliminating all of the office space in the project, because I believe that the presence of office workers creates daytime foot traffic and would enhance/enliven the proposed public open spaces, and provide customers who would spend money at the proposed market/eateries on the site.

The project as proposed does have great additional public benefits, from its environmental design, children’s museum, good paying living wage jobs, and many great public spaces, including the fact that the top floor is open to the public free of charge, to views that are normally only reserved for occupants of luxury condos or office towers.

This developer is open to community concerns and I support working with him for an appropriately-scaled project that truly serves the community."
Oct. 1, 2014 Michael Feinstein

[Editor's Note:  An earlier version of this question stated that the proposed development was 15 stories rather than 12, hence Feinstein's comment in the first paragraph of his response. On Oct. 17, 2014 we corrected the question to state that the proposed development is 12 stories, not 15.]

"I am concerned that if the City allows this sort of development on its own land, it will open the floodgates to private developers who claim they are entitled to the same privilege on their own sites. I also believe that this site is a great opportunity for a public open space different in atmosphere and ambience than the Third Street Promenade’s kinetic tenor.

I believe that we have not adequately explored all of the alternatives for this site and am particularly disturbed by a process of requisitioning that includes no resident input. Residents must be involved in the beginning, middle, and end of any process to develop City-owned property, including the request for proposal. That did not happen here. I also would eliminate all of the office space from this project as we need no more."
Oct. 1, 2014 Sue Himmelrich

"The Clock Tower building is an iconic structure and a landmark whose design and height make it one of the most recognized buildings in all of Santa Monica and Los Angeles. For the property at 4th/5th and Arizona to respect the natural environment, perform many functions and stand the test of time, it will have to be versatile and sustainable for the very long haul. A sustainable project with a great mix of uses that integrates seamlessly into the Downtown (and respects the environment and provides abundant open space) can be achieved without reaching heights that are out of scale to its surroundings. The 4th/5th and Arizona project has not been before the Planning Commission so I have not formally reviewed the current proposal but from what I know of the project as proposed, it should not be built as proposed."
Oct. 1, 2014 Jennifer Kennedy

"That area should be green. I believe all the city's properties that they owned should be greened, and by greened I don’t mean another hundred million dollar park. I believe that a green space does not have to have a hundred thousand square feet of concrete and another ten million dollars of consultants."
Oct. 1, 2014 Terence Later

"The proposed 148 foot building is out of scale. Like a Christmas tree, with too many ornaments, the City has asked too much of the developer. This building as proposed can’t be built. If built, as proposed, its size and bulk will overwhelm 4th and 5th streets. Its relationship with the sidewalks is unacceptable. Many of the building elements create huge chunks of building ten stories above the sidewalk. Finally, it will push the City skyline upwards. On City owned land a higher standard must be expected."
Oct. 1, 2014 Richard McKinnon

"Same as the question before it will change the DNA of that particular location and will completely change the character of downtown. It is unsuitable to that location."
Oct. 1, 2014 Zoë Muntaner