Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/23/1987 - Adjourned City Council MeetingROLL CALL ADJOURNED RB3UTAR MEETING CF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY CF CDSTA MESA November 23, 1987 The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, met in adjourned regular session on November 23, 1987, at 6:30 p.m., in the Multi-purpose Room of Rea Cc munity Center, 661 Hamilton Street, Costa Mesa. The meeting was duly and regularly ordered adjourned from the regu- lar meeting of November 16, 1987, and copies of the Notice of AdjourmTent vere posted as required by law. The Mayor called the meeting to order, and he appointed Council Member Hornbuckle to chair the maeting. ODUI-IL MEMBERS PRESENT: Hall, Amburgey, Wheeler, Hornbuckle, Buffa ODUNCI L MEMBERS ABSENT: Done OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Manager, City Attorney, Develcpirent Services Director, Public Services Director, Deputy City Clerk PUBLIC HEARING This was the titre and place set fx)r the public hearing Supplement EIR to consider Final Supplement Environmental Impact Report No. 1033S; No. 1033S, and the proposed widening of Victoria Street Victoria Street between Harbor Boulevard and Canyon Drive. The Affi- Widening davits of Publishing and Mailing are on file. Canmunications were received frau the following persons: Residents at 1094 Glen Circle, Costa Mesa, in support of the widening; Maurice N. Karkar, 944 Victoria Street, Costa Mesa, objecting to the widening; and Maureen McManus, Post Office Box 5394, Gardena, owner of prop- erty in Westbluff Village on Victoria Street, asking that the widening plans include adequate parking on Victoria Street. During the meeting, a letter was submitted by Wilson Roberts, 857 Governor Street, Costa Mesa, in support of EIR-No. 1033S and the Composite Alignment Plan, includ- ing the recommendations from the Planning Commission. Council Member Hornbuckle announced that at the last public hearing, Council made the decision to widen Victoria Victoria Street; therefore, _vhether or not to widen the roadway was not the issua at. this time. Council Member Wheeler disagreed with Council Member Hornbuckle's staterent, stating that the proposed resolution references a "no project" alternative. Council Member Wheeler asked if it was the chair's intention to prohibit people from addressing the "no project" alternative. Council Member Ebrnbuckle replied that was not her intention. The Public Services Director reviewed his memorandum of November 19, 1987, vhich contains background information on the project. At the meeting of July 7, 1987, Council certified EIR No. 1033 as being completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Council also directed staff to prepare a supplemental EIR to. examine the CanFosite Alternative. Supplement EIR No. 1033S describes the Composite Alternative as follows: 1 Widening Victoria Street, approximately an equal amount from the north and south sides frau Harbor Boulevard to Pomona Avenue; on the south side only from Pomona Avenue to Placentia Avenue; cross over frau the 'south side to the north side in the vicinity of Placentia; on the north side only from Placentia Avenue to Canyon Drive, providing a separate frontage road for the existingproperties on the south side of Victoria Street fran approximately 400 feet west of Placentia Avenue to the vicinity of State Avenue. The Director then introduced a representative fran the consulting firm that prepared the EIRs. Phil lip R. Schwartze , Vice President, Phillips Brandt Reddick (PBR), 18012 Sky Park Circle, Irvine, reported that PBR prepared both EIRs (No. 1033 and No. 1033S). After Council directed preparation of a revised align- ment known as the Canposite Alternative, Supplement EIR No. 10335 was prepared to evaluate any issues not addressed in prior EIR No. 1033. Issues which were evaluated in the supplemental EIR included potential noise impacts on the adjacent areas, the effectiveness of various sound wall placements in reducing noise levels, the feasibility of additional project alterna- tives, and how successful the alignment would be in reducing the rumber oE driveways fronting on Victoria Street. Additionally, the supplemental EIR provides clarifications on various technical issues related to future traff is volumes. Mr. Schwartze commented that the Canposite Alternative has several benefits for traffic flow and for the adjacent land uses not found in the project alternatives. These advantages include a frontage road vhich separates local traffic west of Placentia Avenue to; Canyon Drive; adds lane capacities to accommodate projected future traffic volumes; reduces driveways fronting Victoria Street; provides opportuni- ties for contiguous and continuous sound walls and landscape buf'fexs which separate the roadway from the residential areas; and finally there is an identifica- tion of a variety of design mitigations to reduce noise impacts • further , such as sound wall extensions.. The conceptual designs indicate that the project will result in notable circulation improvements, and although approximately. 100 dwelling units must be acquired for public'right-of_way purposes, the remaining units along Victoria Street will be located in a more enjoyable setting. Sid .Lindmark, PBR Project Manager, gave an extensive slide presentation Which consisted cf four general parts: environmental impacts associated with the widen- ing of Victoria Street; noise analysis for the project; the impact of the- project on those lots along Victoria Street; and project alternatives. Fred Greve, Mestre Greve Associates, Consulting Engineers, 280 Newport Center Drive, Suite 230, Newport Beach, also gave a slide presentation, and explained the noise impacts associated with the project and proposed mitigation measures. Sid Lindmark submitted a letter for the record which contains additions to Final Supplement EIR No. 1033S: (1) Page 2 of the Errata Sheet: 31 The results indicate that existing CNEL (Canmunity Noise Equivalency Level) noise levels from Placentia Avenue to Ponona' Avenue 29-. are acceptable for conmercial uses but exceed the City's exterior noise standard of 65 dBA for residential areas other than driveways and parking areas. The existing noise levels between Canyon Drive and Placentia Avenue, and between Ponona Avenue and Harbor Boulevard are also above 65 dBA at the 60 -foot right-of-way line. (2) Page 9 (7-8) of the Response to Comments: The proposed project strikes a balance between access and unrestricted traffic flow. Alternatives B, C, E, arra F address the issues cited. (3) Page 11 (15-1) of the Response to Comments: The project evaluated in EIR 10335 is shown in Exhibit 2 . . . (4) Pagr 1 of the Errata Sheet: 17 Exhibit 3 - Parcel No. 1 is added immediately east of Canyon Drize on the north side of Victoria Street. The lot immediately north cf Parcel 7 on Exhibit 3 (2155 State Street) is a potential acquisition, depending on the final street design. Mr. Lindmark responded to Council Member Wheeler's request ibr clarification of the following items con- tained in Supplement EIR No. 1033S: "... productivity of the area will be enhanced ..." (Page 45, first paragraph, last sentence) "Traffic flow, access arra vehicular, pedestrian and bicyclist safety will be improved." (Page 4, third paragraph, last sentence) Percentages of units presumed to be rentals. (Page 15, last paragraph) Acquisition costs. (Page 18, second paragraph) Appendix B, letter from Kunzman Associates, concern- ing the Placentia Avenue/Victoria Street intersection service level being improved slightly in comparison to today's operational characteristics. Roadway widening having the effect of widening the noise zones without mitigation as a function of increased traffic volumes, changes in travel lane geonetrics and increased speed. (Page 31, last sentence) Council Member Wheeler directed a question to staff regarding mitigating the land use effect, asking why the word "shall is used when referring to buying property at fair market value, but in sore instances where relocation benefits are referenced, the word "should" is used. The City Attorney responded that the City is required by law to provide relocation benefits, therefDre the ward "shall" can be substituted. Responding to an inquiry from Council Member Wheeler, the Public Services Director reported that if Council [1 (293 were to drtemaine that it is necessary to acquire four or five additional parcels, the estimated cost of the project .would be over the present estimate of $12 mil lion. The Development Services Director gave examples of projects where sidewalks are included or excluded from open space requirements. Council Member Wheeler responded that it appeared the EIR is incorrect,since it includes sidewalks as part of the project's 'open space when they should have been excluded. Responding to Council Member Hornbuckle, Mr. Lindmark reported that air quality will be better if the project were constructed. Council Member Wheeler read a letter in the supplemental EIR from the City of Huntington Bead which indicates that the original EIR was not received and requesting that a copy be_forwarded* to them. Council Member Wheeler asked if the EIR had ever been sent to that city, and if so, was a response received. The City Planner for the project reported that the records show that the- original EIR was sent to Huntington Beach; however, after receiving the subject letter, another copy was forwarded to them. There was no response from that ci ty. . Warren West, 700 Victoria Street, Apartment C-1, asked how long it would take after the project is canpleted to drtemnine where additional soundproofing is needed. The Public Services Director replied that after the sound walls are built, and if Council wishes to provide second floor buffering, sound tests would be taken to detemnine what is needed to reduce noise levels. Mr. West expressed concern that widening Victoria Street would invite additional truck traffic. Gladys Digins, 2151-A ATrerican Avenue, canplained about noise and filth caused by. truck traffic, and suggested widening 19th Street instead of Victoria Street. In response to Council Member Wheeler's gLestion, Ms. Digins reported that her building is a duplex and she does have a tenant in the other unit. Council Member Wheeler stated that'the reason he asked that question was because the EIR excludes any relocation impact on people who are in owner -occupied multiple units; there- fore, the EIR is inadequate. Larry Gast, 2135 Sterling Avenue, stated that sound attenuation walls must be higher than six feet to be of feet ive . Martha Kirby,. 970 Victoria Street, asked how the City intended to proceed with property acquisitions. She sug steel that if the City. wants to take her house for the project, then the City should purchase a canparable home for her. Phil_ Marx, 854 Darrell Street, asked if the City also intended to widen.22nd Street (extension of Victoria Street east of Newport Boulevard) . The Public Services Director responded that the City is not actively pur- suing that project but itis being studied. Jeanette Taylor, 2130 National Avenue, asked if there would be a traffic signal at the National/Victoria intersection. The Public Services Director responded that the plan is to relocate the signal frau Monrovia/ Victoria to the National/Victoria intersection. Darrell Pheasant, 924 Congress Street, was concerned about ingress and egress for the 24 units that are to be constructed at 817 Victoria Street because of the raised median vhidz is planned for that locality. He also was concerned about traffic backing up if a signal were to be installed at the National/Victoria inter- section. Robert Ramirez, 743 Victoria Street, was of the opinion that widening Victoria Street would increase traffic arra pollution. He asked how long it would take for the City to buy the required properties if the project were approved. The City Manager reported that he will be recanmending to the Council to raise all cf the funds in total and make all acquisitions as soon as possible. This can be done through various techniques, either through a Bond Issue or Certificates cf Participation which would allow the City tb raise the appropriate money for right-of-way acquisition and repay that over a 20- to 30 -year time period. As to construction costs, if the City can proceed in the short teen, that is, the two- to three- year titre frame, it would- allow the City to make appli- cation to the County for Arterial Highway Financing funds, to accumulate gas tax funds, and to identify other sources of funding. RECESS Council Member Hornbuckle declared a recess at 9:00 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Council Member Hornbuckle asked the City Manager to address the Proposition 13 property tax benefits. The City Manager stated that when Federal, State, or local governments need to acquire real property in California, those who owned property prior to 1978 with the institu- tion cf Proposition 13 can transfer their existing tax rates to their new residences. At the request of Council Member Hornbuckle, Tom Holm of PBR addressed the concern of Mr. Ramirez regarding air quality.'' uality. Mr. Holm explained why air quality will improve as a result of the street widening. Anne Hogan Shiereshev,sky, 2152 Elden Avenue, Apartment. No. 1, suggested that the City build a senior citizens facility before it widens Victoria Street. Rob Armstrong, 671 Governor Street, asked vhat was planned for a certain area between Panona and Puente Avenues vhidz he identified on a canposite drawing, and also asked what streets are being considered as future cul-de-sacs. The Public Services Director responded that these issues will be addressed during the design stage. Mr. Armstrong questioned sorre cf the statistics contained in the supplemental EIR, canmenting that he found glaring. errors. Mr. Armstrong asked to be put on record as questioning the validity of the EIR. Tony Kubis, 861 Victoria Street, cam anted that at the last public hearing (July 7, 1987), staff stated that the speed limit would be increased to vat the new alignment would allow. Mr. Kubis disagreed with the appraisal information contained in the supplemental EIR. Larry Richardson, 2178 Raleigh Avenue, referred to Page 33 of the EIR and Slide 14 of Mr. Lindmark's presenta- tion concerning noise levels. Mr. Richardson mentioned that the noise level at Raleigh Avenue will increase as a result of the realigmmnt; however, sound walls are not proposed for that location. Mr. Richardson was not satisfied with staff's cammnts that sone issues will be discussed' during the design stage, stating that the citizens' specific concerns -should be addressed now. The Public Services Director responded to canments made by Mr. Richardson regarding sound walls. An auxiliary lane has been proposed -for the Raleigh Avenue area which will mitigate the noise fran Victoria Street; also, an eight -foot wall cannot be constructed up to the edge of a driveway because sight distance would be impaired. If the auxiliary lane is eliminated, that area can be used for sore type of buf fer. At the request cf Council Member Hornbuckle, the Public Services Director reported on vhat the next steps will be following this public hearing, assuming that the Council approves a project. -The next step is to estab- lish a precise alignment which is discussed at a public hearing because it involves a change to the Master Plan of Highways. He mentioned that the City could use the CALTRANS procedures, that is, establishing an advisory task force that meets with staff and the consultant during various design stages. There is also the appraisal review process, acquisition process, and then the construction phase. These are all overlapping phases.. Corey Armstrong , 671 Governor Street, read a lengthy stateirent v,hich she submitted ix)r the record. Mrs. Armstrong cpposed the project, contending that widening .Victoria Street will not alleviate traffic. She also gave seven reasons why the supplemental EIR is not acceptable. Gary De Vine, 2120 Monrovia Avenue, spoke in support of the project, and encouraged Council to proceed with the Bluff Road drvelcpment. Ed 011ila, 927 Wilson Street, stated that the projected traffic figures are scmev+hat conservative, and asked when the new alignment would be outdated. The Public Services. Director responded that a four -lane divided highway with controlled access should be able to handle 40,000 cars per day adequately. Staff is projecting that in the year 2010, based on the City's traffic model , there will be approximately 28,000 cars per day. Therefore, the street ceuld handle 12,000 rmre cars per day before showing congestion. Arlene Swarts, 700 Victoria Street, Unit D, asked for an explanation of bond financing. The City Manager explained the types cf bonds available and canmented that a report regarding financing options will be sub- mitted to the Council for consideration. Ronald Young, 2100 Monrovia Avenue, suggested construct- ing four traffic lanes since Victoria Street was a four - lane roadway some years ago., and it would negate the need to acquire properties. The Public Services Director responded that the existing 60 feet of right-of-way is not adequate to provide four lanes of traffic, sidewalks, and bike trails. Neither would there be room for construction of protected left - turn lanes. ;=r96 Bob Hamilton, 674 Victoria Street, spoke against the project, and agreed with the letter submitted by Mrs. Armstrong. He recanmended widening 19th Street, constructing the 19th Street bridge, and developing Bluff Road. Mr..Hamilton canmented that Council Member Hornbuckle had pledged to support construction cf the 19th Street bridge. Council Member Hornbuckle responded to Mr. Hamilton's comments, stating that she does support construction of the 19th Street bridge, and to the best of her know- ledge, the County is now preparing an EIR. She further reported that when Council goals were established several months ago, ,Bluff Read was placed high on the list cf transportation goals, and the bridge on 19th Street was also made a tcp priority. Council Member Hornbuckle mentioned that construction of the 19th Street extension was taken into consideration when the EIR for Victoria Street was prepared, and the traffic projections are based upon the 19th Street project being canple ted . There being no other speakers, Council Member Hornbuckle closed the public hearing. Council Member Wheeler stated that the EIR is inadequate for the ' followi ng reasons: It was not prepared in accordance with CEQA (Cali- fDrnia Environmental Quality Act) as is proven by the letter at the end cE the EIR stating that Huntington Beadh never received the EIR documents. The rental displacement impacts were not adequately considered and, in fact, are erroneous because there is an assumption in the document that owner occupied R2 and greater lots do not have renters. That, is not true based on conmon sense and the evidence presented tonight, and it was never considered in the EIR. The appraisal values in the EIR directly contravene the evidence and ca=n sense of anyone familiar with real estate values that appreciation is greater than three percent a year in this area; yet, there is no reference in the tIR as to who provided the three percent figure. The EIR contravenes the City's own laws on what is considered open space. The EIR specifically states that cpen space for the project includes sidewalks and ib do so is* not correct. The period cf time that the supplemental EIR was available for public review was inadequate. The EIR states that a six-foot high sound wall is adequate when the City Council's own program for secondary arterials calls for eight -foot sound walls. Vice Mayor Amburgey admitted that most people who spoke this evening opposed the project;, however, since the last public hearing, he talked to many people in the Victoria Street area who support -the project. He ccmirented that whether the traffic is frau Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, or arry other area, it is vitally important to mitigate the traffic as soon as possible. He was of the opinion that the best solution is to widen Victoria Street, to extend 19th Street, and to develop Bluff Road. 91? Council Member .Buffa stated that"the worst part of this job is having tp"take people's property. He believed Victoria Street must be widened -because it is a two-lane roadway -which has become a major east/west thoroughfare, and the only "major east/west route in the City is Adams "Avenue. Council Member.-Buffa pointed out that the 19th Street extension is not an alternative, but rather a component for improvement of east/west access. He mentioned that devel-opnent of Bluff Road is being actively pursued by the Council. Council Member Buffa was of the cpinion that improvements for east/west access should have been constructed marry years ago. On behalf of Mayor Hall, Council Member Hornbuckle asked the City Attorney to respond to Council Member Heeler's conmments on the inadequacy of the EIR, that is, his opinion as to whether or not'more information is needed, or if Council can take- action on the document this evening. The City Attorney responded that it was his opinion that all the comments made by Council"Member Wheeler had been answered by staf f arra/or the consultant. He stated that he believed the EIR-serves as a reasonably adequate document providing Council with information showing the environmental impact of the"project, and on that basis, it was his opinion that the EIR was adequate. Council Member Wheeler added another reason why he thought the EIR was inadequate: at the beginning of the meeting Council -,.Member Hbrnbuckle announced that the decision to widen Victoria had already been made and some people left at that tire. He pointed out that whether or no.t . -to widen the roadway was one of the alternatives in the EIR` and must be considered. He believed the. statanent by Council Member Hornbuckle may have led some people -to leave because they thought they could not address the "no project" alternative." In view of this, the process was" inadequate. Also, Council Member Wheeler stated that as to the project itself, it was his, opinion that the costs to those people who will lose their homes is, far` greater than any benefits which will be derived from the project. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Buffa to certify Final EIR 10335 that Final Supplement EIR No. 1033S was completed in Certified canplianoe with CEQA. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Amburgey; and carried 4-1, Council Member Wheeler voting no. M3TION A motion was made -by Council Member Buffa to certify Final EIRs that Final EIR No. 1033 and Final Supplement EIR 1033 and 1033S No. 1033S were reviewed and considered by the City Certified Council"prior to final action'on any associated project. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Amburgey, and carried 4-1, Council Member'Wheeler voting no. Council Member Hornbuckle announced that she would like to express her q�inion at this time. She reported that because she lives in the area, -she has spent a lot of time driving and walking up and down Victoria Street,, and has spent; a lot, of timre talking with people who live along Victoria Street and -in the surrounding neighbor- I-ood. She comuented that Victoria Street should have been improved long ago because people along that roadway pay an emotional cost for which there is no compensation if the street were not- improved. She believed that the emotional costs of living along a highway that carries r 20,000 cars per day. with no sidewalks or bike lanes, and which will carry 28,000 cars per day whether or not the City does anything, also must be considered. She_ stated that it is difficult to make a decision involving the taking of homes; however, she did not believe it would be very responsible fDr a City Council to refuse to do anything because the emotional casts are too high. She cannented that it is nore responsible for the Council to let the pecple know what improvements must be made, where the alignnent will be, and what hones must be acquired. Council Member Hornbuckle stated that she believed she was elected to make these difficult deci- sions, not to wte for what is popular because she would not do that. In conclusion, she stated that as' difficult as this decision is because of the taking of people's homes,'she nevertheless believed that Victoria Street must be improved, it appears it will be this City Council that will make that improve ant, and she was willing to be part of that because it will improve traffic circulation for the people who live in this City, will improve the neighborhood through which Victoria Street runs, and will be of benefit to the west side. MOTION Council Member Buffa made a motion to adopt the Canpos- Canposite ite Alternative alignitent, including the recammendations Alternative of the Planning Commission as reflected on Page 2 of the Alignnent Adopted; mermrandum from the - Public Services Director dated Resolution 87-109 November 19, 1987: Adopted; EIR Amended 1. Install eight -foot walls relative to sound attenuation; 2. Alternative A, Page 39, require acquisition of 13 additional units; 3. Alternative'C, Page 40, regarding cul-de-sacs for various local residential streets where they intersect Victoria Street; 4. Alternative E, Page 42, relating to proposed sound walls esctending frau Victoria Street along intersecting streets - modify to make option available -to property owners; 5. Alternative G, relating to proposed bicycle trails on the south side of Victoria Street - limit to west of Placentia Avenue; 6. Alternative H, regarding elimination of auxiliary lane in the Placentia Avenue to Ponona Avenue segment; to adopt Resolution 87-109, being A RESOLUTION CF THE CITY COUNCIL CF THE CITY CF CJOSIA MESA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIROMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 1033 AS REVISED BY FINAL SUPPLEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 1O33S FOR THE VICTORIA STEET WIDENING PROJECT; to substitute "shall" for "should" in the EIR when refer- encing relocation benefits, including assistance to displaced renters; arra to pursue acquisition of prop-- erties as saon as possible so that residents whose properties must be acquired will be aware of their status. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Amburgey, and carried by the following roll call vote: 1 f AYES: .ODUNCIL MEMBERS: Hall, Amburgey, Hornbuckle, Buffa NOES: ODUNCIL MEMBERS : Meeler ASSENT:. ODUNCIL MEMBERS: None ADJOURNMENT Council Member Eornbuckle declared the reeting adjourned at .11:00 p.m. Mayor cE the City of Cost Mesa ATTEST: City Clerk ,cf the City, of Ccs esa