My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Correspondence - #22 - Response to Late Comments
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2024
>
09/17/2024
>
Correspondence - #22 - Response to Late Comments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2024 9:56:40 AM
Creation date
9/17/2024 6:45:10 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
There is a development under construction now at Macarthur and the 55 freeway. <br />THE VILLAGE (adjacent to this proposal, and across from South Coast Plaza) has already been presented. CC7.2 <br />Think what a project like this would do to the area where you live. Cont. <br />The Development Agreement must contain more mitigation for the area. Remember, the owners of this <br />property also own property on the East side of Bristol. Perhaps parts of this could contain modified right <br />turn / access -egress provisions to mitigate the issues. <br />"PUBLIC BENEFIT FUNDS" <br />$22,000,000 has been suggested for "Public Benefit". Considering the current costs of just about <br />everything, this is absurdly inadequate. What does it cost to fully reconstruct 2 miles of Macarthur Blvd? <br />( Hint: roadway reconstruction costs have been rising by 24% per year; UP 69% since December of <br />2020.)* The increase in construction traffic alone will accelerate the need for work on Macarthur and <br />other arterials, already in jeopardy. This will need to be done before the RELATED project is fully <br />contributory. Traffic on Flower, Sunflower, Macarthur, and Fairview will greatly increase, with a need for <br />increased maintenance. The proposed funds will be exhausted just maintaining** what we have, and <br />nothing will improve or be mitigated. The majority of the funds proposed need to be allocated to the <br />area that will be most impacted by the development. There needs to be local citizen input, with full <br />voting on how funds would be used. <br />CC7.3 <br />The developer has touted the economic boon (sales tax, real estate taxes / valuation, increased <br />economic activity) this will be for the City. That `largess" is in the future: 10-15 years. But the area will <br />suffer and degrade in the interim. There will be an immediate decrease in funds from businesses, and <br />increase in infrastructure deterioration. The investment of the Public Benefit funds in the immediate <br />area is needed to off -set this impact, AND to ensure that the area is prepared and attractive to future <br />residents, investors, and retail customers. If this does not happen, if the funds are parsed throughout <br />the city on short-term pet projects and feel -good promotions, the development will not deliver the <br />future projected gains. We must maintain the long view on the investment of the area. Remember the <br />pain, economic impact, and ongoing traffic issues of the trolley? And how we were hamstrung by the <br />County? The City needs to utilize the funds to offset the issues, anticipated and unanticipated, for the <br />local area. This project impact will be an order of magnitude greater in volume and duration; in the area <br />that is a large (largest?) contributor to the City budget. The project will undoubtedly impact that budget <br />when we can least afford it, the next 2-6 years. <br />More Public Benefit from the developer, spent in the area around the development, with active input <br />from the residents and businesses most impacted. <br />*https://enotrans.org/article/fhwa-highway-construction-costs-continued-to-grow-at-24-annua I -rate/ <br />**https://www.santa-ana.org/documents/draft-2022-pavement-plan CC7.4 <br />"the arterial network will change from "Good" to "Fair" condition from FY2022123 to FY2028129 <br />...level of funding is insufficient to stabilize the backlog since the unfunded deferred M&R projects <br />will increase by43 percent for the arterial network and increase by35 percent for the local network. <br />9-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.