Item 23 - Amendment Application (Zone Change) No. 2024-01 to Amend the Zoning Map

Home Browse Search

Ocampo, Nuvia From: J Cramsie <jcramsie72@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 6:23 AM To: eComments, PBA Subject: Planning Commission Mtg_2024-02-26_Public Hearing Item 2 Comments To whom it may concern, I am resident in the vicinity of the proposed McDonalds, located at the intersection of Santa Clara Avenue and Tustin Avenue. I live off of Santa Clara, across from the Santa Ana Cemetery, for over 10 years. I was reviewing the IS/MND document that was posted on the City website provided in the notice sent to my house. However, I discovered that none of the Appendies were included with the document. After much searching, I was finally able to find the appendies, through the Planning Commission Agenda. In the future it would best to included ALL the documents into a single PDF so people would not have to search for documents in multiple locations. While reviewing the WQMP information, it notes that the infiltration rates, at 5 feet in depth, for the site are 0.22 in/hr and 0.18 in/hr, per a geotechnical report dated October 9, 2021 and that it was attached. In reviewing the geotechnical report, it references the percolation data can be found in Appendix C of the report, but it was not include, and neither was Appendix B. Without being able to review the complete document, verification of the values can not be determined and therefore, can not be confirmed. The plans show the use of underground storage chambers, that would collect the water before being pumped. The plans shown a gravel base under the chambers, it the intent to allow for some infiltration of stormwater? In reviewing the Transportation Analysis (Appendix K), several questions/concerns come to mind. The study area primarily focused on Tustin Avenue and the only analysis done for Santa Clara was the driveway to site. What about the increased traffic on Santa Clara, specifically westbound traffic from the project site due to vehicles not being allowed to turn left out of driveway? Currently the drive aisle backs up when a vehicle is trying to make the left out of the site and can not because the EB left turn pocket is stacked up. This is a concern in the AM and PM timeframes when vehicles are either access the freeway in the AM a --or return home in the PM. Vehicle who are forces to turn right out of the project site onto Santa Clara, who actually wanted to turn left, will be forces to make U-turns at existing residential streets, causing potential conflicts with residents existing their tracts. The Queueing Summary (Table 3-2), in my opinion is flawed. In the EB, WB and NB direction, there are 2- way left turn lanes proceeding the defined turn pocket lengths and from personal experience the que of vehicles, vehicles back up into those 2-way lefts on a regular basis. Especially in the NB direction in the PM, the EB direction in the AM and PM. Also, the SB is being shown at 150 feet, but since there this is a duel left, with each lane being 150 feet, the que can be doubled. In Section 4, how was the Trip Direction Split determined? Also, is this split representative of the AM or PM? I would think in the AM, more vehicles would be heading to the freeway and less back onto Santa Clara, which is mostly comprised of residential areas with no immediate access to a freeway. The PM would logically have more vehicles coming from Tustin Avenue, since they would be coming from freeways. Making a single assumption of the split for both conditions causes false conclusions or results of the analysis. The analysis indicates that the drive through can accommodate 16 vehicles, however, based on the configuration, should there be a peak of over 16 vehicles, the main driveway aisle from Santa Clara to the rest