HomeMy WebLinkAboutNEIL SHERMAN (ITEM 4) From: Neil Mail
To: Yasuda. Erica
Subject: Additional comments for the Council regarding Sept. 7,council meeting agenda item
Date: Tuesday,August 31,2021 1:07:59 PM
Erica,
I plan to address the Council at the Sept. 7 meeting. Please provide all the council members
the following pertinent information that, due to time limits, I couldn't include them in my
presentation.
Thank you,
Neil
From:
Neil Sherman
TMCA-Board President
To:
Tustin City Council
Please read these additional comments/concerns not addressed in the oral presentation, due to
time limits, regarding the proposed project at 13751 & 13841 Red Hill Avenue that is on the agenda
for the September 7, Council Meeting
1. With respect the proposed project, street parking on sweeper days opens up more
problems for the new residents, including low-income housing families. Where can they
find an acceptable off-street parking location, and not suffer getting a expensive parking
ticket.
2. Look at the locations of the public plaza's within the development. One on the Northeast
corner open to Redhill traffic, and the 2 smaller ones flanking the entrance driveway.
Would residents really congregate there with the noise from the traffic,particularly with
their children?
3. Does the space within the project provide adequate parking space size, adequate
separation between walkways and open spaces, with internal traffic flow? Is there a
potential public safety issue as residents walk within the project?
4. The RHASP was developed as a integrated plan. Shouldn't each project with the corridor
be evaluated based on its impact across all the areas within the plan? This project is being
evaluated as a stand-alone project, not on its impact across RHASP.
5. Does the City have plans that resolves the extensive lack of street parking spaces,
increased traffic flow, and potential need to update the EIR update?
6. The City's traffic planner talked about the future plan to widening Redhill at this
property. Does the expected traffic flow growth from the 600 residential units, cause the
widening to be sooner rather than later?
7. The open space waiver causes family's with small children living within this project,
walk at least 2 blocks to get to a the nearest city park, crossing crowded streets along
Redhill. Is this a also a safety.
S. Look at the Parking Management Plan. Are the proposed options realistic,particularly
after the project is approved, built, and other off-site parking areas are upgraded?
9. Does increased traffic on Redhill, Camino Real, San Juan, and the new driveway for
residents/commercial traffic causes additional safety issues to Tustin High students, as
these streets are used by them for entry and exit of Tustin High?
10. The Developer said they only contacted residents within 500ft. of the project, and
interested parties. No residents living within 200 ft of Redhill along the rest of the
corridor were contacted. The developer implied no real concerns from the residents. Did
they let those residents know about the inadequate on-site parking, the parking
management plan and waivers? Designated as a interested party, I was also contacted. A
individual contacted me that she wanted to talk about the project. I had to ask her about
her relationship to the developer, it wasn't volunteered,but eventually she did tell me she
was hired by the developer. I then asked her whether there were any waivers in the
project. She said no, didn't mention the park area waiver. I asked her to send me the
developers presentation or plans that will be presented to the Planning Commission. See
said she would, but I have as yet, to receive them. I believe the lack of negative
comments from nearby residents is because of the lack of transparency and candor about
the total project from the developer. I also believe their focusing on the limited number of
residents within 500 ft. of their project, rather than all the residents within 200 ft of the
Redhill corridor, gives a skewed perspective from affected residents.
11. Are there plans the city can quickly implement to stop the tactics used by this developer
from being be copied by the other multi-use properties along the corridor? This could
become a serious issue across all the designated low income housing areas within Tustin
if not addressed now.
12. If the residential units within the corridor grows as expected to 600 or more units, does
the EIR have to be updated, and Redhill widened? If Redhill has to be widened, the 12
off-site parking spaces in this project, will disappear sooner than later.
13. Would traffic associated with 600 residential units cause Redhill to be widened sooner
rather than later.
14. What specific options within the parking management plan can be easily implemented
when the project is completed?Is there a minimum time period the developer has to keep
the 6 low income housing units, as low income? Or could he quickly convert the units to
normal residential income units?
These are many issues that should be addressed before this project is approved.
Continue to be the leaders who have the foresight and vision to maintain a beautiful city,
values its citizens safety and lifestyle, and a city with a reputation for smart economic growth.
Thank you,
Neil Sherman
TMCA-Board President
Sent from my iPad