Loading...
31 (431) Susana Barrios From:Kent Andersson <kentchristel@icloud.com> Sent:Tuesday, October To:Public Comment Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Deer Canyon development Attachments:TBCF_2.docx You don't often get email from Learn why this is important Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. I am opposed to the development. See attached information. Thanks Kent Andersson 1 Tra?ic Bottlenecks and the Camp Fire Source: LLG Tra?ic Study, LA Times Article, “Paradise narrowed its main road by two lanes despite warnings of gridlock during a major wildfire 11/20/18 Next Friday marks the six-year anniversary of the Camp Fire, where 85 people tragically lost their lives, many of them elderly and forgotten, while others were trapped in their cars trying to flee. A major contributing factor to this tragedy? Tra?ic bottlenecks. A Bay Area tra?ic engineer conducted a study predicting that the main road was capable of handling evacuation but it instead created chaos. I am not suggesting that we will experience the exact same outcome as Paradise; they faced factors that we do not have. However, we also have unique challenges that they did not have. Unlike Paradise, we have the 91 freeway and a highway infrastructure that allows Riverside County residents to use Anaheim Hills as a shortcut. During a wildfire evacuation when we are in danger, residents in Riverside County would still need to reach their jobs in Irvine, Tustin, and other parts of Southern California. They will not be taking vacation time to keep our roads clear. This will contribute to gridlock in tra?ic layouts that di?er significantly from those in Paradise. Tra?ic engineers underestimated the speed at which fire could spread in Paradise. Although Southern California resources rushed north to help, Paradise was ultimately destroyed. The lesson here is that studies can be flawed, especially when real-life circumstances, such as evacuation routes, emergency tra?ic flows and human behavior are not accurately represented. Here in Anaheim Hills, we risk creating similar bottlenecks that could hinder evacuation e?orts when lives are at stake and first responders' response times are limited. We need to address these challenges, but adding thousands of new vehicles and variables is not the solution. Using the Police Force to require neighborhoods to shelter in place to prevent tra?ic is a civil rights violation and not an e?ective or legal form of tra?ic control. Please vote against rezoning this area beyond what is feasible and manageable for this area. It is not our fault that SALT decided to purchase this land, but it would become your responsibility if it is rezoned for a building that the fire department has classified as a high- rise and unsustainable for the region. Climate Hubs Source:https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/A%20Guide%20to%20Stayin g%20Safe%20During%20Wildfires_1.pdf I’d like to share an excerpt from a Climate Hubs document related to evacuation and wildfire safety in urban interface zones. For those unfamiliar, Climate Hubs is a collaboration of various department agencies that use scientific research to develop and deliver "science-based" solutions. The document’s summary emphasizes, “Ready! Set! Go!”—not sit back and ‘stay put’ as Brian Hobbs suggests. Their solution Shelter in Place as a tra?ic mitigation strategy is simply taking the advice of fire experts out of context. Fire Safety Experts unanimously agree that getting out should always be Plan A. The Climate Hubs document defines Shelter in Place as something necessary when \[quote\]“evacuation isn’t safe,” or when your only evacuation routes take you into the fire, the fire is moving too quickly or too close to evacuate safely, or if escape routes are blocked or congested. The document also highlights a tragic reality: A common way people die in wildfires is being trapped in their cars. It says,\[quote\] “Many people who perish in wildfires do so in vehicles. One reason is because they wait too long to go or they think their vehicle can move faster than a wildfire.” The developer has said tra?ic impact during an evacuation is being exaggerated, claiming tra?ic would move the same if this project were built. But their study falsely assumes that everyone would ignore their instinct to leave and instead ‘stay put.’ The developer has not provided any documentation or study explaining how that would work, while dozens of government agencies and experts say it’s completely unrealistic. This entire plan relies on taking the fire study out of context. In fact, the Firesafe document uses the term “shelter in place” zero times. The study concludes that during a severe emergency, residents will have areas to shelter in place for protection until help arrives, but it doesn’t prove they must shelter to prevent bottlenecks. Surrounding this proposed development are dozens of roads and thousands of homes that all flow onto Santa Ana Canyon Road, with no other way out. We need you to vote to keep this area zoned as-is, for the housing project it was originally designed for.