Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/23/1993 - Regular MeetingCOUNCIL MEMBERS s ROLL C LL Pre ent I x I x M Al yes Motion All Ayes Motion All Ayes u X x x X X X CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING PLACE: Council Chambers TIME: 7:00 P.M. DATE: August 23, 1993 INDEX Mayor Turner made a presentation of award to Dennis Danner, Finance Director, for "Excellence in Financial Reporting" by Government Finance Officer's Association. X x ROLL CALL Reading of Minutes of Meeting of August 9, 1993, was waived, approved as written, and ordered filed. Reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration was waived, and City Clerk was directed to read by titles only. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were approved, except for those items removed: RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 1. Resolution No. 93 -64, establishing OFF- Parking STREET PARKING METER ZONES AND Meter Zns/ REGULATIONS FOR THE OPERATION OF PARKING Bal Bl METERS and rescinding Resolution No. 93- Res 93 -64 52 (Balboa Boulevard between Island Avenue and 6th Street). [Report from (85) the Public Works Department /Traffic Engineering] 2. Resolution No. 93 -65, changing the hours Parking/ of "NO PARKING" FOR STREET SWEEPING ON Rstrctn6 ONYX AVENUE from 8:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m., 0 nx Av to 8:30 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. [Report from Res 93 -65 Public Works Department /Traffic (85) Engineering] 3. Resolution No. 93 -66, requiring traffic Trfc /Cliff on CLIFF DRIVE to stop at the Dr intersection of Santa Ana Avenue. Res 93 -66 [Report from the Traffic Affairs (85) Committee] CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 4. Accept recommendation of the Income Marina Par; Property Committee to affirm the MOBILE Property HOME PARK as the highest and best use of (73) the property and direct staff to commence negotiations to, extend the MARINA PARK LEASE. [Report from the Deputy City Manager] 5. Approve a Professional Services Hazel Dr Agreement for design of the HAZEL DRIVE Wtr /Swr WATER & SEWER MAIN RECONSTRUCTION Mn Cnstr PROJECT; preparation of detailed plans C -2892 & specifications by Daniel Boyle Engineering, Inc., for a fixed fee of (38) $37,400. [Report from the Utilities Department] 6. PERSONNEL VACANCIES - Report from (66) Personnel Director. 7. CLAIMS - For Denial by the City Manager: (36) Din R. Daleabout alleging large branch from City tree fell onto his parked vehicle and caused body damage as well as broke his windshield on August 1, 1993 at 1601 Bedford Lane. Volume 47 - Page 220 ROLL CALL s • Motion All Ayes • COUNCIL MEMBERS x CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1\1 August 23, 1993 Curtis Fleming, alleging City workers were breaking up concrete for purpose of repairing sidewalk on Vista del Oro and did windshield damage to his parked car on July 22, 1993. John Y. Harkins II, alleging his vehicle was hit by City Refuse Truck at 13661 Pine Street, Westminster on July 30, 1993. Darryl L. Laws, alleging damage and destruction to home as a result of public improvements constructed by Griffith Company under City contract in area of 500 39th Street between June 6 and July 21, 1993. Lynda Novikoff, alleging City Police Officers in assisting moving claimant's car at Main and Balboa on July 30, 1993, ran subject vehicle into street sign. Edward Phillips, alleging City trees are uprooting bricks and cement around home at 2200 Laurel Place, and could cause injuries. Katherine Purcell, alleging protruding pole sign in the Newport Beach Parking lot caused damage to rear window of her vehicle on March 16, 1993. Gay Scarborough, alleging City tree roots are causing damage to patio, etc., at 427 -1/2 Carnation Avenue. Roger D. Sherwood, alleging City Police Officer broke his gold necklace when removing it at the Newport Beach Police Station on January 31, 1993; seeking reimbursement of $15 for new latch. AGREEMENT FOR NONSTANDARD IMPROVEMENTS AT 2421 EAST COAST HIGHIiAY - Approve a Construction & Maintenance Agreement for nonstandard improvements for a fire service installation at the subject address and its connecting piping within the public right -of -way in the alley west of Begonia Avenue that is parallel and north of Fourth Avenue and south of Coast Highway; and record subject agreement with the County Recorder. [Report from the Utilities Department] 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS OF AUGUST 5, AND AGENDA FOR AUGUST 19, 1993 - For Council information and filing. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. Council was advised that the City Clerk had received a letter from the applicant (after the agenda was printed) requesting a continuance to September 13, 1993. and Mayor Turner made a motion to grant that request for the following, as presented in a report from the Planning Department: Volume 47 - Page 221 MINUTES INDEX Permit/ 2421 ECHy Utilities (65) Planning (68) U/P 3505 (88) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS V\ August �S 23, 1993 ROLL CALL • • Motion All Ayes x A. Us Permit No. 3505 - Request to permit the conversion of an existing 69 unit apartment project known as the Granville Apartments to residential condominiums, on property located in the Unclassified District; B. Tentative Man of Tract No. 14839 - Request to subdivide a single parcel of land into two numbered lots for attached residential condominium purposes, seven numbered lots for detached residential condominium purposes, one numbered lot for landscaping purposes and a future manager's office, one lettered lot for private street purposes, and one lettered lot for private recreational purposes; rim C. Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 20 - Request to approve a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance relative to the City's Low and Moderate Income Housing provisions, as they apply to the conversion of a 69 unit apartment project to condominiums, on property located in the Coastal Zone. Located as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 10 -20 (Resubdivisions No. 233 and 240), 1001- 1147 Granville Drive, westerly of Newport Center Drive, in Newport Center. 11. Mayor Turner opened the public hearing bearding proposed ORDINANCE N0. 93 -20, �$. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING TITLE 20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERMITTING PET SHOPS, ANIMAL HOSPITALS AND ANIMAL GROOMING FACILITIES IN THE COMMERCIAL AREAS OF THE CANNERY VILLAGE/MCFADDEN SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 782). Report from the Planning Department. The Planning Director advised that the Specific Area Plan for Cannery Village/McFadden Square, generally states that unless a use is specifically spelled out as being permitted, then it is not permitted. The reason for the subject ordinance is to add the provision to allow pet shops, animal hospitals, and animal grooming facilities in the commercial areas of Cannery Village/McFadden Square in keeping with the zoning ordinance that was in existence prior to the time the specific area plan was adopted. After it was determined that no one wished to speak to this issue, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made to adopt Ordinance No. 93 -20. Volume 47 - Page 222 yM(il1_ft *� Tr14835 Ord 93 -20 Zoning (94) COUNCIL MEMBERS CALL m ik \1� • 0 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 PUBLIC COMMENTS Randy Johnson, resident of Corona del Mar, appearing on behalf of the Newport Taxpayers Alliance, addressed the Council, requesting additional time, rather than the specific three minutes for public comments, which was granted. He proceeded to express concern about the ballot language for Measure A, i.e., ... "the cost to the taxpayer shall not exceed $120 per year." Specifically, he requested that the Council instruct the City Attorney to: 1) change the wording of the Notice and Ballot so that it removes any reference to the fact that the assessment amount is fixed; and 2) strike language from the rebuttal argument that relates to the fact that the amounts stated are fixed and cannot be increased. He solicited help from the citizens of Newport Beach by either calling their organization, or making a donation to oppose Measure A. Mayor Turner requested that the City Attorney get an outside legal opinion regarding the Council's authority to change the assessment once it has been put in place, and whether by protest or public hearing process the Council has the right to fix the assessment by making a unilateral decision that the assessment amount will not go up. The City Attorney offered to continue discussions with the opponents/ proponents of Measure A to discuss language modifications, providing that the modifications not interfere with the timing of the Orange County Registrar's office for printing of the ballots. The Council does not have the legal ability to change the ballot language once the petition for Writ of Mandate is filed in Superior Court. At the request of Mayor Turner, (regarding the legality of the signers of the ballot measure and rebuttal arguments) Vic Sherreitt, resident of Balboa Island, and member of the Newport Taxpayer's Alliance addressed the Council. He stated they were instructed by the City officials that the ballot argument should be signed by no more than five people. Regarding the rebuttal, they were told that it should be signed by the same five ballot signers. When the rebuttal arguments were presented from the Conservancy they found that there were four new signers. Mayor Pro Tem Watt commented that a legal opinion will be sought regarding the signers on the ballot argument and rebuttal. Volume 47 - Page 223 MINUTES INDEX Measure A COUNCIL MEMBERS Motion All Ayes • 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 12. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -18, being, Ord 93 -18 Zoning AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL (94) OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING TITLE 20 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REVISE THE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ABUTTING ALLEYS WITH WIDTHS OF 24 FEET OR MORE FROM 2 FEET 6 INCHES TO A ZERO FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT No. PCA 780 780). Report from the Planning Department. The Planning Director advised that this is the second reading of the subject ordinance, and that the public hearing was held on July 26, 1993. The ordinance has been amended to reflect the deletions that the Council recommended and is now ready for adoption. Notion was made to adopt Ordinance No. 93 -18. CONTINUED BUSINESS 13. Report from the Public Works Director SJHTC /Toll concerning the SAN JOAQUIN HILLS Issue /Npt TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR ( SJHTC) TOLL Cst Dr ISSUE, AND NEWPORT COAST DRIVE Extnsn EXTENSION. (74) Supplemental report from the City Attorney. Letter from Yvonne Houssels, representing the Harbor View Hills South Homeowners Association, dated August 11, 1993, concerning the pledge made to the City of Newport Beach that the SJHTC/Newport Coast Drive would alleviate traffic congestion in the City. The Council was advised that after the agenda was printed the City Clerk's office received letters in opposition to the toll booth from Mr. and Mrs. S. B. Anderson, and Beverly Bain and Mark Finkelstein. The Public Works Director stated that at the meeting of July 26, 1993, the Council directed that the elimination of the toll on the northwesterly end of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor be pursued. A letter was addressed to William Woollett, CEO of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency (SJHTCA) asking how the toll can be eliminated and what procedures are to be followed. Mr. Woollett has responded to this letter, and copies of the City letter and Mr. Woollett's response are attached to the staff report. The Public Works Director also pointed out that Mr. Woollett and several TCA staff members are in the audience. Volume 47 - Page 224 COUNCIL MEMBERS CflLL • C CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 The Public Works Director advised that Mr. Woollett's response and conclusion is that the TCA's fiduciary responsibilities to the bond purchasers preclude the elimination of the toll. The Public. Works Director indicated that the supplementary report from the City Attorney contains further discussion on this subject. In response to question from Council, Mr. Woollett addressed the Council, stating that he brought members of the TCA staff and advisers in an effort to answer questions tonight, such as Wally Kreutzen, Finance and Administration; Rob Thornton, General Counsel; Greg Hank, Design and Construction; and Bob Whalen, Counsel to the bond holders. Mr. Woollett advised that because of the difference in the meeting schedules of the SJHTCA Board of Directors and the City Council, it is not possible to have all the answers to the questions posed in the Public Works Director's letter, but that the Board does have the City's letter and his response at this time. Mr. Woollett deferred questions of the Council regarding the projected revenue from the Newport Coast Drive toll to Wally Kreutzen. Mr. Kreutzen stated that he had not seen a copy of the City Attorney's supplemental report to the Council, and asked that he be allowed to read the report. In answer to question regarding contradictory directions from the Council, the Public Works Director stated that the Council has taken two separate actions, which are not mutual exclusions, and that the staff. is pursuing both actions. He went on to point out, as indicated in the staff report, that City Council action on May 24 focused on the alternative of implementing the Newport Coast Drive extension. This position on this regional traffic issue places the City on the "high ground," is a positive and productive approach to resolution of the issue, and has engendered support from other key agencies involved. This effort should not be diluted. At the request of Council, Wally Kreutzen advised that regarding revenues, right now without any substantive basis regarding the accuracy of the figures, the following excerpt from the City Attorney's supplementary staff report is correct: "Official Statement to relevant investors.... .Newport Coast Drive toll is projected to account for $1,668,800 in toll revenues during the first full year of operations (1998) which is 2.3% of total anticipated toll revenues during that year." The 2.3% could be extrapolated through the 40 -year pay back period on the outstanding bonds. Volume 47 - Page 225 MINUTES INDEX SJHTC /Toll Issue CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COLNCIL MEMBERS S' August 23, 1993 ROLL CALL • • • In an effort to answer Council question regarding the 2.3% total anticipated toll revenue and what would happen by eliminating the toll booth, Mr. Kreutzen advised that there is a process that needs to be completed by the TCA Board of Directors, in the event that toll revenues fall below expected projections. First of all, the TCA would have to obtain the services of a traffic and revenue consultant, look at the Corridor in total, and come back with a report to the Board, providing recommendations and approaches for the Board. It would entail a rather elaborate toll and revenue study within certain prescribed time lines contained within the indenture of trust. 2.3% may not sound like a lot, but when you look at it over time, this is a significant amount of: revenue associated with the payback and financing. Mr. Kreutzen deferred questions of Council regarding bond financing to Bob Whalen, wherein he advised that while bond holders can be approached with amendments, dealing with institutions of this magnitude toward restructuring financing, history has shown that there is very :Little, or no incentive after the fact. With respect to the earlier question of collecting the toll at Newport Coast in particular, there is no easy answer. He can understand why the Council feels that 2.3% doesn't seem like a big percentage in such a large scheme, but the difficulty is with the legal relationship that exists between the TCA and the investors in the bonds that aggregate approximately $1.1 billion. Reference was made to the nOfficial Statement" to the investors ... "The toll collection and revenue management system will be a closed system for collection of tolls. This closed system will include one mainline toll plaza near the center of the toll road and 14 ramp toll plazas located at certain interchanges." Reference was also made to the Wilbur Smith Transportation Study, which includes tables with recommended toll collection schedules /locations, thereby making a record of representations to the investors which includes the collection of tolls at Newport Coast Road. In the TCA view, to go back and suggest moving that toll exposes them to substantial liability and loss of integrity with the investors. Greg Henk addressed the questions of Council concerning the cost of construction to join the Corridor to the terminus of the 73 freeway, advising that along the stretch of the proposed Corridor there will be a significant amount of construction, mostly consisting of grading, retaining walls, major structures, paving, signing, lighting. With regard to the actual dollar amounts, the TCA does have Volume 47 - Page 226 MINUTES COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CRLL s • • is CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH \%\L August 23, 1993 figures split on broad sections; four of the figures are broken down from the $800 million design built contract, but he couldn't tell the Council today what the limits of the northern section are and what that dollar figure is. There is a fly -over ramp at Jamboree that was originally proposed and the one referred to by Council is approximately an $8 million structure. With regard to asking the TCA to eliminate the toll within the City of Newport Beach, and the fact that the City is asking for all that construction and somebody else paying for it, Mr. Hank responded that they want to avoid discussing the City boundaries because when you refer to the City of Newport Beach, there are the corporate limits of the City that go up and into the construction area, and City traffic which some people would propose as being City residents, others would say both residents and those employed within the City, others might say it is those that are employed, reside or do business in the City. It would be hard to define what City traffic is from a traffic standpoint; and construction that serves it may extend beyond corporate limits. But, the TCA does have a lot of valuable information to share regarding this issue, and would be glad to continue to meet with groups of citizens. In addressing Council inquiry regarding moving ahead on the six points of the by -pass that will be free, Mr. Hank advised that this is a County project, and he is not in a position to report on the exact status at this moment, but knows that a lot of progress has been made. The County has been working diligently on this project, there has been a commitment of funds to the project, and it is moving ahead. The Public Works Director reported that the City of Irvine has accepted and expressed support for an alignment of the Newport Coast Drive Extension. The amount of $3.6 million to date has been made available towards the cost of construction, and the County is continuing to pursue supplementary means of funding with some success, but he does not have any specifics to report to the Council, as yet. The City of Irvine and the County are mutually working on the parameters of the Environmental Impact Report; and on a cooperative agreement between these two agencies to pursue the steps necessary to construct the roadway. The Irvine City Council has initiated the process of amending its Master Plan of Highways to include the extension of Newport Coast Drive. Also included in tonight's staff report is an Orange County Environmental Management Agency meeting report from the affected agencies which involves the establishment of a project development team starting the various processes Volume 47 - Page 227 MINUTES SJHTC /Toll Issue COUNCIL MEMBERS • • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES August 23, 1993 INDEX that are necessary to accommodate a SJHTC /Toll highway construction project. He is Issue pleased with the rate at which the progress is being made for the Newport Coast Drive Extension. The preferred alignment (Alternate 3) is supported by both the Irvine City Council and the City of Newport Beach. There is no cost estimate available as yet, but the $3.6 million is not enough to complete the job, and additional funding will be required. In answer to Council inquiry regarding when the toll fee will increase, Mr. Hank referred to Table 24 of the TCA report, which recommends an increase from 50 to 60 cents in the year 2001 for the Newport Coast Toll Plaza, and the next increase is 75 cents in the year 2006. In response to Council question regarding what the Federal money was for that was guaranteed, Wally Rreutzen advised that this should be viewed as a line of credit from the Federal government in the event that toll and traffic revenues are not sufficient after debt service reserve funds, contingencies, and all of the reserves have been expended. The Federal government is in a position to loan money to the TCA, with a maximum amount of $120 million, and no more than $24 million per year in the first five years of operation. If this money is not utilized, it cannot be carried over. In answer to Council question regarding what funds the TCA has sufficient to construct the Corridor, Mr. Rreutzen advised that there are certain limited provisions contained in the Indenture of Trust for completion bonds to where certain amounts of completion bonds can be issued. If the road is not open and no tolls generated, this is the only containment, since this is a non- recourse financing, so basically the facility must be completed. The guarantor of these bonds would be the TCA. In response to Council question whether the cost of Newport Coast Drive would be approximately $8 million, and would include right -of -way, the Public Works Director advised that there is no detailed cost estimate as yet. In response to Council question concerning what would happen if through legislation, or through some other means the toll roads are removed, Rob Thornton, Agency Counsel, advised that in the event there was specific legislation adopted the bond holders would get involved in litigation. There are very significant constitutional issues regarding impairment of contracts under the United States Constitution, and in fact, there is well established Volume 47 - Page 228 Milo a R1 I'S 0 9 z M w al %1xim L q • • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 Supreme Court case law limiting the ability of legislatures and limiting the ability of Congress to enact legislation which retroactively impairs contractual obligations by private parties. He added that there are very significant legal limitations on the Constitutional authority of the Legislature or Congress to enact that kind of legislation. Concerning Council comments that Newport Coast Drive is a "free road," Mr. Thornton responded that Mr. Woollett's letter addressed the chronology, and that the alignment for the Corridor was set well before the establishment of Newport Coast Drive in that location. Prior to the approval of Newport Coast Drive, the TCA had announced its intention to obtain the authority to impose tolls, and the State Legislature had provided that authority. He added that there was public notice, and all of these decisions were made in public meetings, and no one should have been "surprised" that, in fact, the toll facility was going to be constructed where it is proposed to be built. Council Member Debay commented that, being the new member on the Council when this issue came up, she had a lot of research to do. One of the most meaningful documents to her was the excerpts from the EIR that was published in 1990. She cited a page that talks about the toll booth and the location, a map that indicates two toll booths at Pelican Hills Road, and two between Ford and Bison. Also a letter addressed to the toll agency from Spyglass Homeowners Association that is dated November 1, 1990, addressed to Steve Latterly of the Corridor Agency with copies to the Council Members, speaks to the installation of two toll booths impacting upon Pelican Hills bypass route. She stated that somebody in the City picked up the fact that in the EIR there were toll booths on Pelican Hills Road, and that there has been an unfair argument for Council to say that it was not documented. Council Member Sansone referred Council Member Debay to the City of Newport Beach comments on that identical EIR, and there were no comments in that EIR that mentioned anything about toll roads. Also, the comments on the EIR were prepared and dispatched without Council approval or notification. In fact, the EIR pages that she is citing first came to public notice in San Clemente. Why was this particular hearing held in San Clemente, and not held in Newport Beach? Mayor Turner responded that at that time the toll road was not an issue, and focus was placed on the realignment of Ford Road, which was the big issue. Volume 47 - Page 229 MINUTES COUNCIL MEMBERS • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 At Council request, Gene Foster, TCA, advised that regarding the 16,000 diversion, this number is taken from their EIR, and specifically it is the number of cars on Coast Highway that shows traffic in the no -built situation for the Corridor and with the Corridor in place in the year 2010. If the Corridor were built, there are some 16,000 trips that would not use PCH, and would use the Corridor instead, originating from the south County and all along Pacific Coast Highway starting as far south as San Clemente, Laguna Beach, Dana Point and on up the route coming north. By the time traffic gets to Newport Coast Drive and Pelican Hills Road there is a diversion to the Corridor of 16,000 trips, and this attraction would be for those people who prefer to use a more direct route along the San Joaquin Corridor. The City staff has met with them, and asked that the TCA confirm some of these numbers by an Origin /Destination Study or a Link Analysis Study, and they have a consultant preparing a proposal. Pending the City staff's review of this proposal, they will be prepared to answer questions in greater detail. Yvonne Houssels, Board Member Harbor View Hills South Homeowners Association, stated that she was representing neighbors who live in Jasmine Creek, Spyglass Ridge, and Spyglass Hill and authorized to speak on their behalf. She addressed the Council adding that she strongly feels they must continue the removal of the proposed toll booth, or move it farther south, whatever is necessary to take it out of that stretch between MacArthur and Newport Coast Drive, and that this is the only fair and reasonable solution. Mrs. Houssells referenced the recent newspaper articles in the Register and Daily Pilot, wherein Assemblyman Gil Ferguson has stated that he also is opposed to a toll being placed on this stretch of road, which previously was a "free" and open road, and he does intend to support legislation to this effect. Their Association feels that Alternate 3, although it is the best that has been proposed, presently still does not run parallel to the Corridor, and traffic still has to go south, then north, then back south again. This will not alleviate traffic in the City of Newport Beach, or Corona del Mar. Also, if the City is to remain a part of the TCA, it is up to the TCA to respect the needs of the residents of Corona del Mar, as well as the City of Newport Beach. Volume 47 - Page 230 MINUTES INDEX SJHTC /Toll Issue. COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CRLL s 0 • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH \ \\ August 23, 1993 Jean Morris, resident of Corona del Mar, representing Harbor View Hills Association, and an Officer of the Corona del Mar Residents Association covering 13 Homeowners Associations from Irvine Terrace to Cameo Shores and inland, addressed the Council. She stated that everyone in Corona del Mar wants the City Council to help them preserve the bypass, and asked for their support in making changes. No one has said that they cannot remove the toll booth, because they don't want to remove it. The bottom line is how much money is going to be returned from these toll booths. The bonds were sold on how much return the tolls are going to reap, and if they can't return enough money to the bond holders, they would have to pay a higher rate of interest. She emphasized that Corona del Mar is not going to be sacrificed for something that was somehow not quite right, and the toll booth has to be either removed or moved to a place of advantage to them. Staff has said that the 50 cent toll will not affect the toll -way usage, there is no report or study where anyone can guarantee how much money it will take to affect people from using the toll -way. 50 cents is a dollar coming and going. Nothing ever goes down, and there could be a $2 toll one of these days. This is a lot of money for a commuter to pay. Economic times can change and once that toll booth is poured into the concrete, the residents can't change it. It can be changed now with the right kind of pressure if the City of Newport Beach were to remove itself from the TCA. The City expects the TCA who is serving the citizens to come up with an answer, not to tell us how tough it's going to be, not how many meetings there have to be, but they are professionals and they can do it. Don Glasgow, President of the Corona del Mar Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council, stating that their official position is for the elimination of the toll booth, and are most concerned about getting more specific details of what the options might be on getting the road that goes around the toll booth. There are a lot of loose ends, and the businessmen in Corona del Mar are concerned. They feel very strong about this entire issue, as do the foregoing speakers. They also believe that a lot more cars will return to the PCH, and affect the businesses in Corona del Mar. Carla Barnett, 3400 Catamaran, Harbor View Hills; addressed the Council, stating that she is very concerned about the toll booth, and that it will increase the traffic in Corona del Mar. She finds it conflicting to be reassured that the toll won't add to the traffic, and yet it is necessary to support the bonds. She made reference to the Volume 47 - Page 231 0011 *9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS 0 �� r \%\ S' August 23, 1993 ROLL CALL MINUTES testimony given by the TCA, that they SJHTC /Toll could not change the toll booth because Issue this would "undermine the integrity to the investors." She feels that integrity is very much at issue here, as the Council Members, a former Mayor, and The Irvine Company didn't know about the • toll booth location. She has lived in Harbor View Hills for 10 years and has attended a lot of Council meetings, or watched them on the television. She reads the Daily Pilot each day, and was not aware of the toll booth location. She feels that there is some integrity owed to the residents, particularly of Corona del Mar, who are supposed to experience less traffic as proposed by the proponents of the Corridor. She further stated that she has attended a TCA meeting before the public and after the pledge and prayer, the entire TCA got up and left to a private chamber leaving the public to sit and wait for one hour. When the TCA came back they allowed a few people to make statements, but they didn't give any indication that they felt responsible to respond or take any of the comments under consideration. Her feeling is that the public was not asked how they feel about this issue, or given the opportunity to vote. She expressed her appreciation to the members of the Council for their support to the residents of Corona del Mar. Following discussion of the four • recommendations made by staff in their report to Council, Mayor Turner stated that there is distrust regarding the viability of diverting 16,000 cars as the result of construction of the toll road. There has not been a study that specifically addresses that issue, and it might be worth the City's money, or the SJHTC's money to do a study by an independent traffic engineer to see what kind of impact it will have on Corona del Mar. Council Member Hart suggested that the TCA pay for the independent traffic study, wherein Mr. Woollett was asked if there were funds available to conduct such a study, and he replied that such a proposal could be made to the TCA Board. The Public Works Director responded to Council by stating that staff has discussed the parameters of such a study very briefly with the TCA; however, he did not know if anyone has come up with a cost estimate. • Mr. Foster reported that the TCA had received a draft proposal from a traffic consultant that may be acceptable to the City. The proposal covers two components that the City may have an interest in: 1) Select Link Analysis, with a cost of approximately $9,000, which would tend Volume 47 - Page 232 COUNCIL MEMBERS VIVA0 *\k • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 to verify the 16,000 trip attraction from PCH to the Corridor; 2) Origin/ Destination Study, essentially a study where postcards are handed out to traffic as it travels along a selected route (such as intersection of Newport Coast Drive and PCH). The TCA has received an estimate of roughly $25,000, and the total therefore is about $34,000, and emphasized that until the City staff has had a chance to look over the scope of work, that number is approximate. In response to Council inquiry, Greg Henk advised that there are two elements when you get into this kind of analysis; 1) Doing traffic modeling which is done by the County, by SCAG, done locally, and it projects traffic based on previous origin destination studies and other information; 2) There is a separate study done by a traffic and revenue consultant, and there are probably three well -known traffic and revenue consultants in the United States. The conversions from normal demand calculations, which would exist under various toll analysis are pretty well respected world -wide. The TCA has information available where they have done the analysis, know generally how much diversion occurs, both the pre - traffic and the toll- traffic, and they know approximately what the diversion would be and could apply this to an analysis if the TCA would do the Select Link Analysis. With respect to the larger of the two numbers from the two traffic analyses, the Select Link Analysis will confirm or not the 16,000 differential and has the capability of analyzing home base trips. This analysis is the lower of the two and supplies the bulk of the information that people are looking for. In comparison, the Origin /Destination Study is only used for developing or confirming models, and is not used to forecast but as a basis for forecasting, and is a more expensive component of the analysis. Through computer analysis many things are factored in such as the shortest path, different origins and destinations via toll road, or stay on the free route, and the system of analyzing trips is to categorize them based on income and other factors to determine the proportion of trips shared between the free path and the toll route. In answer to Council question, Mr. Hank advised that the revenue traffic consultants do work world -wide, and the one the TCA is using, Wilbur Smith and Associates, does a lot of work on the east coast toll roads, and did some surveys on the west coast to try to get some response to habits to compare to the surveys that they have done on the Volume 47 - Page 233 MINUTES sue CODICIL MEMBERS Motion Motion • x x iA CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1993 east coast. The TCA does use the County models and rely on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways for the year 2010 forecast, but they did not include San Canyon in the prior year forecast. Mr. Hank and Mr. Foster responded to Council inquiry regarding the time involved, wherein the consensus was that the traffic analysis can be done very quickly, estimating that the Select Link Analysis could be done in 45 days, but would take longer with the Origin/ Destination Study. The Public Works Director stated that the Select Link Analysis may suffice, and the Origin /Destination Study may not be necessary, but suggested the need for more staff discussion. Motion was made by Council Member Hart to refer the toll booth issue to an attorney experienced in evaluating bond issues and commitments to bond holders, the intent would be to remove the toll from Newport Coast Drive; Assemblyman Gil Ferguson to introduce legislation as soon as possible for backup position; that it is in the best interest of the City at this time to appoint Council Member Phil Sansone as the Voting Member for Newport Beach on the SJHTC with the authority to appeal directly to the TCA Board of Directors and report back in a timely manner to the City. Mayor Turner made a substitute motion to have an analysis by an independent bond counsel regarding the legality of moving /relocating the toll booth; a request that a traffic study be done to determine the effects of the toll booth on the onramps, and verify how many cars would be diverted from Corona del Mar. Mayor Turner stated he believes that Council Member Cox has worked hard in representing the City and in an extraordinarily fine manner on such a difficult issue, and he does not think that Council Member Cox should be removed as the City's representative on the SJHTC. Council Member Hedges made a substitute motion to conduct the traffic study; retain an independent legal bond counsel; request that the toll booth be removed; appoint Council Member Sansone as the City's Alternate on the SJHTC; and schedule on the agenda for September 3.3 a vote on the issue for the City's Voting Representative. Following discussion regarding the appointments made by the Mayor each year with regard to Joint Governmental Committees, it was determined that the appointed members serve at the pleasure of the Council. Volume 47 - Page 234 MINUTES SJHTC /Toll. Issue v Ayes Noes Ayes Noes I; • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS x X The substitute motion made by Council SJHTC /Toll Member Hedges was voted on and FAILED. x x x X X Turner was voted on and FAILED. x x x X X X x x x x x City Hall Bulletin Board located outside x x x MINUTES August 23, 1993 ATTEST: Volume 47 - Page 235 INDEX The substitute motion made by Council SJHTC /Toll Member Hedges was voted on and FAILED. Issue The substitute motion made by Mayor Turner was voted on and FAILED. The main motion made by Council Member Hart was voted on and carried. Heating adjourned at 8:57 p.m. The agenda for this meeting was posted on August 19, 1993 at 8:45 a.m., on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. ATTEST: Volume 47 - Page 235