Correspondence - Item 26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Macarthur is already the de facto alternate for issues on the 405. This is in an area that already has some of the busiest intersec?ons in the County. Between Thanksgiving and Lunar New Year, the area is already frequently gridlocked. There is a development under construc?on now at Macarthur and the 55 freeway. THE VILLAGE (adjacent to this proposal, and across from South Coast Plaza) has already been presented. Think what a project like this would do to the area where you live. The Development Agreement must contain more mi?ga?on for the area. Remember, the owners of this property also own property on the East side of Bristol. Parts of this could contain modiﬁed right turn / access -egress provisions to mi?gate the issues. “PUBLIC BENEFIT FUNDS” $22,000,000 has been suggested for “Public Beneﬁt”. Considering the current costs of just about everything, this is absurdly inadequate. What does it cost to fully reconstruct 2 miles of Macarthur Blvd? ( Hint: roadway reconstruc?on costs have been rising by 24% per year; UP 69% since December of 2020. One intersec?on, Spruce and Segerstrom, will cost $800,000.00 today; what will things cost in another 2-5-10 years? )* The increase in construc?on traﬃc alone will accelerate the need for work on Macarthur and other arterials, already in jeopardy. This will need to be done before the RELATED project is fully contributory. Traﬃc on Flower, Sunﬂower, Macarthur, and Fairview will greatly increase, with a need for increased maintenance. The proposed funds will be exhausted just maintaining** what we have, and nothing will improve or be mi?gated. The majority of the funds proposed need to be allocated to the area that will be most impacted by the development. There needs to be local ci?zen input, with full vo?ng on how funds would be used. The developer has touted the economic boon (sales tax, real estate taxes / valua?on, increased economic ac?vity) this will be for the City. That “largess” is in the future: 10-15 years. But the area will suﬀer and degrade in the interim. There will be an immediate decrease in funds from businesses, and increase in infrastructure deteriora?on. The investment of the Public Beneﬁt funds in the immediate area is needed to oﬀ-set this impact, AND to ensure that the area is prepared and a?rac?ve to future residents, investors, and retail customers. If this does not happen, if the funds are parsed throughout the city on short-term pet projects and feel-good promo?ons, the development will not deliver the future projected gains. We must maintain the long view on the investment of the area. Remember the pain, economic impact, and ongoing traﬃc issues of the trolley? And how we were hamstrung by the County? The City needs to u?lize the funds to oﬀset the issues, an?cipated and unan?cipated, for the local area. This project impact will be an order of magnitude greater in volume and dura?on; in the area that is a large (largest?) contributor to the City budget. The project will undoubtedly impact that budget when we can least aﬀord it, the next 2-6 years. *h?ps://enotrans.org/ar?cle/?wa-highway-construc?on-costs-con?nued-to-grow-at-24-annual-rate/ **h?ps://www.santa-ana.org/documents/dra?-2022-pavement-plan “the arterial network will change from “Good” to “Fair” condi?on from FY 2022/23 to FY 2028/29 …level of funding is insuﬃcient to stabilize the backlog since the unfunded deferred M&R projects will increase by 43 percent for the arterial network and increase by 35 percent for the local network. Pete 2