HomeMy WebLinkAboutTom Broz - with CommentsFrom: ndtabroz@aol.com
S ent: Sunday, Jul y 19, 2020 8:23 PM
To : PC publiccomment
Cc: mrhoa.paw@gmail.com <mrhoa.paw@g mail.com>; mrhoa.nlall@gmail.com
<mrhoa.nla ll@g mail.com>; mrhoa.s wanek@gmail .com
<mrhoa.s wa nek@g ma il.com>; jcnted@g mail.com <jcnted@g ma il.com>;
s uebreilly@g mail.com <s uebreilly@gmail.com>; dans wois h@att.net
<dans wois h@att.net>; rotto@cityoforange.org <rotto@cityoforange.org>;
g s heatz@cityoforange.org <g s heatz@ci tyoforange.org >;
apehous hek@cityoforang e.org <apehous hek@cityoforange.org>;
rgarcia@ci tyoforange.org <rg arcia@cityoforange.org>;
wcrouch@ci tyoforange.org <wcrouch@cityoforange.org>
S u b ject: Public Comment Planning C ommis s ion July 20,2020 Meeting Agenda Item 3.2 -
Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20, Mi nor Site Plan Review No. 1016-20,
Environmental Review No. 1871-20
Attac h men t s: Ltr Thomas A Broz to C ity of O range Pla nning Commis s ion 07-20-2020.pdf;
Attachment 1 - 1993 Sull y-Miller Z one Change Res olution Tentative Tract Map
14747.pdf
FRIST EMAIL
Robert:
I have prepared a letter with my comments on the subject Planning Commission Agenda Item for tomorrow's
meeting. My letter includes six attac hments. Becaus e of the size of the attachments I am going to s end this email
three times so that all attachments get through the City's firewall file size limit.
Please let me know when you have received all three emails.
Thank y ou,
Tom Broz
From: ndtabroz@aol.com
S ent: Sunday, Jul y 19, 2020 8:24 PM
To : PC publiccomment
S u b ject: Public Comment Planning C ommis s ion July 20,2020 Meeting Agenda Item 3.2 -
Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20, Mi nor Site Plan Review No. 1016-20,
Environmental Review No. 1871-20
Attac h men t s: Attachment 2 - 1993 Sull y-Milller Z one Change Res olution.pdf
SECOND EMAIL
Robert:
I have prepared a letter with my comments on the subject Planning Commission Agenda Item for tomorrow's
meeting. My letter includes six attac hments. Becaus e of the size of the attachments I am going to s end this email
three times so that all attachments get through the City's firewall file size limit.
Please let me know when you have received all three emails.
Thank y ou,
Tom Broz
From: ndtabroz@aol.com
S ent: Sunday, Jul y 19, 2020 8:26 PM
To : PC publiccomment
Cc: mrhoa.paw@gmail.com <mrhoa.paw@g mail.com> <mrhoa.paw@gmail.com>
<mrhoa.paw@gmail.com>; mrhoa.nla ll@g mail.com <mrhoa.nlall@g mail.com>
<mrhoa.nla ll@g mail.com> <mrhoa.nl al l@gmail.com>;
mrhoa.s wanek@gmail .com <mrhoa.s wanek@gmail .com>
<mrhoa.s wa nek@g ma il.com> <mrhoa.s wanek@gmai l.com>; jcnted@g mail.com
<jcnted@g mail.com> <jcnted@gmail .com> <jcnted@g mail.com>;
s uebreilly@g mail.com <s uebreilly@gmail.com> <s uebreilly@gmai l.com>
<s uebreill y@gmail.com>; dans wois h@att.net <da ns wois h@att.net>
<dans wois h@att.net> <dans wois h@a tt.net>; rotto@cityoforang e.org
<rotto@ci tyoforange.org > <rotto@cityoforange.org> <rotto@cityoforang e.org >;
g s heatz@cityoforange.org <g s heatz@ci tyoforange.org >
<gs heatz@cityoforang e.org > <gs heatz@cityoforang e.org >;
apehous hek@cityoforang e.org <apehous hek@cityoforange.org>
<apehous hek@cityoforange.org> <apehous hek@cityoforang e.org >;
rgarcia@ci tyoforange.org <rg arcia@cityoforange.org>
<rg arcia@cityoforange.org> <rgarcia@cityoforang e.org >;
wcrouch@ci tyoforange.org <wcrouch@cityoforange.org>
<wcrouch@cityoforange.org> <wcrouch@cityoforang e.org >
S u b ject: Public Comment Planning C ommis s ion July 20,2020 Meeting Agenda Item 3.2 -
Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20, Mi nor Site Plan Review No. 1016-20,
Environmental Review No. 1871-20
Attac h men t s: Attachment 3 - Email F Sun to T Broz 03-04-2020 Re Propos e Sull y Miller Tract
Map 18163.pdf; Attachment 4 - Parcel Maps - Lettered Lots South Side of
Mabury Ave.pdf; Attachment 5 - Mabury Ave Street Ri ght-of-Way.pdf;
Attachment 6 - Tentative Tract Map 0050.pdf
THIRD EMAIL
Robert:
I have prepared a letter with my comments on the subject Planning Commission Agenda Item for tomorrow's
meeting. My letter includes six attac hments. Becaus e of the size of the attachments I am going to s end this email
three times so that all attachments get through the City's firewall file size limit.
Please let me know when you have received all three emails.
Thank y ou,
Tom Broz
1
Thomas A. Broz
6306 E. Bryce Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
July 20, 2020
Planning Commission
City of Orange
300 E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
Subject: Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20, Minor Site Plan Review
No. 1016-20, and Environmental Review No. 1871-20
Commissioners Glasgow, Willits, Simpson, Martinez, and Vazquez:
My name is Tom Broz and I have been a resident of Mabury Ranch for 3 9 years. I am a
both a licensed civil and structural engineer in the State of California and several other
states. I am the recipient of the 2012 ASCE Orange County Branch Civil Engineer of
the Year Award, the 2017 ASCE Los Angeles Section Lifetime Achievement Award in
Civil Engineering, and the 2014 University of Illinois Civil and Environmental
Engineering Department Distinguished Alumnus Award, the University of Illinois Civil
and Environmental Graduate Engineering program being the No. 1 ranked program in
the USA for the past 50 years. I state these accolades only to establish my credibility.
I also must disclose that I am a member of the Board of Directors (BOD) of the Mabury
Ranch Homeowners Association (MRHOA). However, because of the brevity of time
that has been provided to review the three subject documents and because of the
restrictions imposed by our Governor due to the Covid-19 pandemic there was no way
the MRHOA BOD could meet to review and discuss an official pos ition we would take
on this propose tract. However, I can say that most of what I am expressing as my
personal opinion in this letter would be agreed to by the MRHOA BOD.
At your July 20 meeting you will reviewing and asked to approve the three subject
documents which deal with the building of a tract of homes North of Santiago Creek
and South of Mabury Avenue immediately adjacent to the Mabury Ranch community. I
acknowledge that this land is zoned R-1-8 and thus home construction would be
allowed there. I have no dispute with the current zoning but I have concerns with the
timing of the submittal of these documents and with specific details of the proposed tract
map.
First, as you are aware both you and the City Council have approved and certified the
Environmental Impact Report and Tract Map for the Trails at Santiago Creek. You are
also aware that enough citizens of Orange signed a petition calling for a referendum to
be placed on the ballot which will either confirm the City Council’s approval of the Trails
2
at Santiago Creek project or will overturn the City Council’s approval. The location of
the subject Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20 falls within the approved Trails at Santiago
Creek Project. In that project the location of Tentative Tract Map No. 0050 -20 is
designated open space. At this point I question why the City would be accepting
another project for this same site knowing there is currently an approved project for this
site. I would think that should the referendum to overturn the City’s approval of the Trails
at Santiago Creek be passed it would be subsequent to that vote that a new project for
this site would be submitted and considered by the City for approval.
Second, I received the notification in the mail that the Planning Commission would be
reviewing Tentative Tract Map No. 0050-20 on Tuesday, July 14, 6 days before the
scheduled Planning Commission Meeting on July 20. The three subject documents the
Planning Commission will be reviewing were not made available to the public on the
City’s website until Friday, July 17, just three days before the Planning Commission
Meeting. How could anyone in the Mabury Ranch Community, who are directly
impacted by this proposed tract, be expected to review and provide meaningful
comments in only three days? Additionally, the Planning Commission Meeting will be
conducted virtually with no allowance for the public to voice their opinions / concerns
with the proposed tract map. This is not the way a public review process should be
conducted.
Third, the developer of this project provided us their proposed tract map back in early
March which was titled then and still is now Tract No. 18163. W hen we saw this tract
map we voiced are concerns very specifically with the concept of the orientation of
homes facing Mabury Avenue and the rerouting of the Mabury Ave horse trail which is
maintained by the MRHOA (The current horse trail wood fencing was custom milled in
Idaho to the MRHOA’s specifications and then installed and paid for by the MRHOA at a
cost of $50,000.). T here have been two previous tract maps proposed and approved for
this site which were consistent in that no homes fronted Mabury Avenue and the horse
trail on Mabury Ave was maintained as currently routed.
The first of those tract maps, Tract Map 14747, approved in 1993 provided for 25
residences with pad elevations below that of Mabury Ave and set at such an elevation
that no lift station would be required for the sanitary sewer. I have attached that tract
map (Attachment 1) and the Zone Change resolution (Attachment 2) that supported
that tract map describing the reasons for the tract layout.
The second of those tract maps, part of the General Plan Amendment N0. 1-01
approved in 2003, provided for 17 residences with pad elevations below that of Mabury
Ave and set at such an elevation that no lift station would be required for the sanitary
sewer. Unfortunately I do not have a copy of that tract map I can share with the
commission but the Planning Division staff should be able to provide this to you.
W hen we saw the developer’s proposed T ract Map 14747 and its orientation of homes
facing Mabury Avenue and rerouting of the existing horse trail which we the MRHOA
maintain we immediately contacted the City of Orange Public W orks Department to
3
verify who owned the trail and the requirement for it to be maintained where it w as. W e
received an email back from the Deputy Director of Public W orks (Attachment 3)
providing backup on who owned what propert y (Attachment 4) and whose property the
trail sat on which he indicated was in the City’s street right-of-way (Attachment 5). He
also indicated very specifically that the horse trail would not be relocated and thus
no homes could front Mabury Avenue. As a result we assumed the developer would
be told to reconfigure his proposed tract map to be consistent with the two previous tract
maps that had been approved for this site. So to say we are surprised by what is being
put forth before you to approve is an understatement.
I have requested the Planning Division staff to reschedule the review of the subject
three documents to a later date so that we can attempt to get the City and the developer
to agree to a tract map consistent with the two previous tract maps approved for this
property but I have received no response. I specifically would like a revised tract map to
include the following:
No homes to be built fronting Mabury Avenue.
All home pads to be set at elevations below those of Mabury Avenue but if
possible at elevations that would allow the sanitary sewer system to tie into a
manhole on Mabury Avenue at the East end of the project. See Attachment 6
which shows the location of existing manholes on Mabury Avenue.
Should a lift station be required, the maintenance of that lift station should be
included in the scope and responsibility of the homeowners association that will
be established for this tract. This would be consistent with the homeowners
association for the six homes at the end of East Mountain Avenue that are
adjacent to the MRHOA. Tentative Tract Map 0050-20 shows a lift station but
the drafted resolution does not address the issue of who is responsible for its
maintenance.
The horse trail along Mabury Avenue to stay as is and only be a fenced dirt trail .
Should the City desire to also provide a trial around the back of this tract in
addition to the trail along Mabury Avenue that is the City’s prerogative. The
maintenance of that alternate trail should be included in the scope and
responsibility of the homeowners association that will be established for Tract
0050-20.
A perimeter stucco covered block wall similar to that around the perimeter of the
MRHOA to be constructed around the perimeter of this tract .
The trees along the South side of Mabury Avenue should remain and become
part of a landscape planter on the outside of the perimeter stucco covered block
wall similar to the MRHOA’s perimeter wall. See Attachment 6 which shows the
trees and trail along the South side of Mabury Avenue.
4
A requirement should be added to the resolution that stipulates that the homes to
be built in this tract should be a mix of si ngle and two story and should be similar
in architectural features to those in the MRHOA which includes a mixture of wood
siding and stucco on the front of the homes.
Access to this site during construction should be limited to coming from the South
only. No construction traffic to be allowed down Yellowstone Boulevard, This is
consistent with the 1993 Zone Change resolution for this property (Attachment
2).
As I acknowledge at the beginning of this letter I know this land is zoned R-1-8 which
allows for home construction on it. Building a community that blends in with and
compliments the existing MRHOA and minimizes the impact on the MRHOA should be
the goal of all parties involved including the developer , the City, and the MRHOA. I
believe that can be accomplished if we work together.
I request that the City Planning Commission delay making any recommendation on the
subject three documents and direct the City Planning Division staff to meet with the
MRHOA and the developer to come up with a tract map that is acceptable to all.
I thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Broz, P.E., S.E., F.ASCE, F.SEI
Tentative Tract Map 0050-02