Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/11/1989 - Adjourned City Council MeetingROLL CALL ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF COSTA MESA DECEMBER 11, 1989 The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, met in adjourned regular session December 11, 1989, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference lbcm on the fifth floor of City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Council Members Present: Council Members Absent: Officials Present: Mayor. Peter Buffa Council Member Council Member Council Member Ory Amburgey Sandra Genis Edward Glasgow Vice Mayor Hornbuckle (Arrived 9:10 p.m.) City Manager Allan Roeder City Attorney Thomas Kathe Deputy City Manager/Develop- ment Services Don Lamm Public Services Director William Morris Personnel Services Director Steven E. Hayman City Clerk Eileen Phinney Principal Planner R. Michael Robinson Senior Planner Alice Angus Associate Planner Kimberly Brandt MINUTES on motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council November 20, 1989 Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle absent, the minutes of the regular meeting of November 20, 1989, were approved as distributed. ORAL Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, COMMUNICATIONS commented on the Mesa Verde traffic noise impact state- ment which says that the reason the noise level will Mesa Verde Traffic decrease by 4/10ths of a percent to 5.6 decibels adja- Noise Impact cent to)the roadways is due to the lower vehicle speeds Statement attributed to increases in traffic. He said that either citizens will be killed by traffic, or will be asphyx- iated, and this statement is bad for the document. Mr. Sherrick agreed with the staff recommendations rela- tive to the contiguous sums for trip budget transfers, but felt that the necessary approval should come from the Traffic Commission and not be left solely to the developers or to the person transferring these trip budgets. Mr. Sherrick said that increased sanitation rates are due to the increased growth throughout the Orange County area served by the Orange County Sanitation District. ITRMS TAKEN OUT The following items were taken out of order: Public OF ORDER Hearing 2, Consideration of an increase in the collec- tion of Development Fees; Old Business 2, Retired Employ- ees Major Medical Program; Old Business 1, Initial Study/ Environmental Document for the I-405 Access and Widening. `233 PUBLIC HEARING The Clerk announced that this was the time and place set Consideration of for the public hearing, continued from the meeting of Increase in December 4, 1989, to consider an increase in the collec- Development Fees tion of fees (the "Development Fees") pursuant to the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor and the Foothill/ Eastern Transportation Corridor (the "Fee Program"). Development fees only apply to new development; existing residential and nonresidential units are not subject to the proposed fee increase. A communication from the Chamber of Commerce was received requesting that the City lower the percentage increase contemplated relative to development fees which are assessed against single, multiple, and nonresidential new construction. The Public Services Director said that as part of the joint powers document, the City has been asked to review development fees once a year. He said that there has been no adjustment to the fee since 1982, and stated that the Transportation Corridor Agency has looked into the cost and because of significant design and environmental concerns have suggested a new fee schedule which they are asking the members of joint powers to adopt. The City of Costa Mesa is concerned only with the San Joaquin Hills Corridor, in Zone B, which has the lower benefit rate having a slightly lower rate. He said that the fees are only for new development collected at building permit stage. He mentioned that 10 of the 12 cities involved have adopted the increased development fees schedule. In answer to the question from Council Member Genis, Gene Foster, Project Manager, for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, said that the plan is to hold the 48.44 percent of the total project cost which is the interim strategy. He said that one of the items being discussed is whether or not financing cost from the sale of bonds should be included in the developer fees, and the percentage of 48.44 will be revised depending on the financing cost issue and how it is resolved. He mention- ed that approximately 8 percent comes from State and Federal Highway Funding, HR -2. There being no other speakers, Mayor Buffa closed the public hearing. MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Council Amended Resolution Member Genis, Resolution 89-189, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY 89-189 Adopted COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ESTAB- LISHING THE AREAS OF BENEFIT AND APPROVING AN INTERIM INCREASE IN DEVELOPMENT FEES OF THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANS- PORTATION CORRIDOR; (Including recognition of the issue of the connectors which is now under consideration by a separate committee of the Transportation Corridor Agency be resolved, which is included in Section 11.) was adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Buffa, Amburgey, Genis, Glasgow NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hornbuckle OLD BUSINESS The Clerk presented from the meeting of December 4, 1989, Retired Employees revised Council Policy 300-1 concerning Retired Employees Major Medical Major Medical Program. The Personnel Services Director Program gave an overview of this policy, referring to the Decem- ber 11, 1989, memorandum which is based upon the discus - on during the last City Council Meeting. Staff proposed the following changes: Section A.1.: Eligibility. To permit those employees with a minimum of five (5) years of service to partici- pate in the City's Plan. Those employees who retire with between five and ten years of service will do so without a contribution on behalf of the City. This modification reverts back to the original policy in terms of qualifi- cations only. Section C: Employees will be permitted to deposit accured vacation and sick leave, currently entitled to at the time of separation, into the Post Retirement Medical Benefit Plan. This deposit is done on a pre-tax basis affording the employee the opportunity to supple- ment the City contribution in as painless a process as possible. Employees will be notified that, should they select this option, once deposited, they have given up their vested rights in receiving the accrued time as cash. The Personnel Services Director said that the following administrative details are proposed for the program: 1. An open enrollment period will be provided for those former employees who qualify for the program but have left the plan. The one-time period is to recognize the need to provide access to the plan for retirees who gave up their option to participate as the cost became prohibi- tive. 2. Service Credit - The number of years an employee worked for the City will be determined as the total number of years of full-time service. He said that to arrive at a future cost estimate, the City's actuary for the Safety Employees Retirement Plan, Mr. Harry Yamano, was consulted. Mr. Yamano provided the Finance Director, City Manager, and Mr. Hayman infor- mation and assumptions needed to establish a funding rate depending on the actual benefit that will be contributed on behalf of the City. The Personnel Services Director mentioned that there are six findings which wrap together all of the ramifications of the policy, and he recommended adoption of the policy effective July 1, 1990, so as to coincide with the adop- tion implementation of the next fiscal year budget. In response to Council Member Genis's question regarding where the City would get the money to do this, the City Manager said that the funds would came from the City's current contribution to the retirement program. Council Member Amburgey commended the Personnel Services Director, the City Manager, and the Finance Director for their report and investigation of this item. MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Council Revision to Member Genis, the Revision to Council Policy 300-1: Council Policy Retired Employees' Major Medical Program, was approved 300-1: Retired by the following roll call vote: Employees' Major AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Buffa, Amburgey, Genis, Medical Program Glasgow Approved NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hornbuckle S OLD BUSINESS The Clerk presented from the meeting of December 4, 1989, Adequacy of Initial a resolution supporting the adequacy of the Initial Study/Environmental Study/Environmental Document for the I-405 Access and Document Widening. In response to the request made by the City Council at the December 4, 1989, meeting for staff to provide fur- ther information on exact location and condition of the Caltrans restudy of sound attenuation along Garlingford Street between Fairview Road and Harbor Boulevard, the Public Services Director presented the December 7, 1989, memorandum which included: 1) a letter dated November 11, 1989, from Al Fisher, Chief, Environmental Analysis, 2) a map showing the existing noise level survey taken on Garlingford Street, 3) a noise level survey from the Orange County Health Department dated January 13, 1988. The Public Services Director pointed out the following information contained in his December 7, 1989, memoran- dum: 1. The Caltrans noise study was conducted in the back- yard of the residence at 1360 Garlingford Street on November 9, 1989, at 10:00 a.m. 2. A field review of the test site revealed that other than a wooden fence constructed on the property line, no obstructions existed between the measurement equipment and the freeway. 3. All noise measurements conducted by Caltrans were made while traffic was moving at maximum speed and not during the peak traffic hour when congestion results in reduced traffic speed and reduced noise levels. 4. The 24 -four hour noise study conducted by the Orange County Health Department at 1632 Iowa Street on January 13, 1988, reveals that in this vicinity, the maximum noise level occurs between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. He recommended that the City Council review the noise readings and support the adequacy of Caltrans findings for these noise readings, as well as the remainder of the entire environmental document for the I-405 access study. He mentioned that Caltrans has signed their approval on December 1, 1989, and have forwarded it to Federal Highway Administration for final approval. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the chart and map of noise levels. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, protested the single point reading of the decible volume. He said that he does not feel that noise can be measured at one point, at one time, and conclude that the reading is good for a 24-hour period over a 7 -day period. He referred to the Orange County Health Department study of noise levels and said that the readings spread over an 18- to 20 -hour period. Mr. Sherrick emphasized that the engineering study was not adequate. The Public Services Director said that the noise readings taken by the the Orange County Health Department on Iowa Street were immediately adjacent to the Freeway and it was just before the buffer wall went in for the widening of the Harbor Freeway off -ramp, so those decible readings cannot be correlated because the reading studied at this 37 meeting is farther removed from the Freeway than the Iowa Street reading. The City Manager commented that in as much as that parti- cular study was commissioned by the City to support the Mesa Verde Villa Homeowners Associations to obtain sound walls, there are additional readings being taken at the very same locations, on the very same basis, so that the effectiveness of the sound walls can be measured, as well as make recommendations on other efforts that might be undertaken by the residents to help attenuate some of the noise in the homes adjacent to the Freeway. The Public Services Director said that Caltrans has been to the area in question, based on concerns from some of the residents for the overlap in the wall, and taken noise readings. He_said that Caltrans reported that based on the readings which they have taken in the rear of some of the townhomes, and a projection to the year 2010, the noise level will be below the 67 decible threshhold. Jay Humphrey, 1620 Sandalwood Street, Costa Mesa, asked if the 67 decibels was an average, or a continuous 67, and what would be the impact on residents having a con- stant 67 over 18 to 20 hours, as opposed to having 67 once or twice a day. Mr. Humphrey asked if there was any data supporting continuous effective sound on the residents. The Public Services Director responded that there has not been a long term study done. MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Council Resolution 89-190 Member Glasgow, Resolution 89-190, A RESOLUTION OF THE Adopted CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, SUP- PORTING THE ADEQUACY OF THE INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR INTERSTATE 405 ACCESS AND WIDENING IMPROVE- MENTS, was. adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Buffa, Amburgey, Glasgow NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Genis ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hornbuckle Council Member Genis opposed the Resolution because she said that the noise reading period was exceedingly limited, and the distribution of noise at Iowa Street was 68.1 Leq for a 24 hour basis, a 70 Lbn, and a slightly over 70 cnel, which is unacceptable for residen- tial areas. PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Buffa opened the public hearing, continued from EIR No. 1043; the meeting of November 28, 1989, for the following GP -89-02, General items: Plan Review Program General Plan Review Program: Final Environmental Impact Report No. 1043; General Plan Amendment GP -89-02; (a) Proposed goals, objectives, and policies; (b) Proposed land use building intensity stan- dards; (c) Proposed land use element map amendments; (d) Amendments to the Master Plans of Highways and Bikeways; and (e) Final recommendations on the remaining General Plan topics. The Principal Planner introduced Terry Austin and Kendal Elmer from the firm of Austin Foust & Associates who pre- pared the traffic analysis of the General Plan Environ- mental Impact Report. He recommended that the City Council hold the final hearing on the Environmental Impact Report, receive any additional public testimony, close the hearing, and direct staff to prepare the neces- sary resolutions and documents to complete the final EIR. In answer to Council Member Genis's question regarding the base line traffic to calibrate the model being taken when Orange Coast College was in session, Mr. Austin said he would check on that. Council Member Genis suggested that there be a list of things, such as, signal synchronization, eliminating driveways within so many feet of the intersection, to make the actual more closely approximate the theoretical analysis of traffic. Mr. Austin said that the General Plan should stress for measures to maximize the efficiency of signals, and that there is Federal money for grants to do this. The City Manager responded to Mayor Buffa's question about consultants coming and analyzing the City's signal- ization posture and said that the City is presently look- ing at proposals for consulting firms to give assessments on evaluating the City's entire system and synchronize the signals. He said that an evaluation will be made of the system and recommendations made the first of the year, and then implementation. Council Member Genis suggested that there needs to be a mention of what effects the plan will have on the region- al system, and designations in the General Plan should match data in the model. The Principal Planner said that our population/employment projections are very close to what the County anticipated and used in their traffic modeling. EIR No. 1043 Malcolm Ross, C. J. Segerstrom & Sons, 3315 Fairview Road, Comments Costa Mesa, said that the true plan is driven by the market, irrespective of the General Plan. Janet Remington, 1164 Boise Way, Costa Mesa, spoke about the importance of the General Plan. Alan Remington, 1164 Boise Way, Costa Mesa, mentioned that the best time to analyze traffic at Orange Coast College would be at the beginning of the semester; the end of the semester at the college would be the poorest time to take a traffic analysis. He said that the City was projecting much higher traffic than its neighbors. David Palmer, 1622 Corsica Place, Costa Mesa, said that it is difficult to get from one side of town to the other. Council Member Amburgey explained that the reason for the higher projection was that, by State law, staff must take every parcel in the City and project the traffic should that parcel be built out to its full maximum. ' 239 Gene Hutchins, 1808 Kinglet Court, Costa Mesa, was con- cerned about how the Air Quality Management Plan was used in the EIR to justify the lower air pollution emissions in the City of Costa Mesa at build out. He said that the EIR hangs its hat on the success of the Air Quality Man- agement Plan. Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, pointed out that there is a forecast of construction of a large number of units in Irvine, and the Council must consider how that will impact Costa Mesa's traffic in the north end. Mayor Buffa said that even more revealing than the City's General Plan will be the analysis of other neighboring cities' plans and what effect they will have on each city. In answer to Council Member Genis's question, the City Manager said that we are now negotiating to include the City of Santa Ana in the General Plan and monorail studies. Frank Cole,2842 Fairview Way, Costa Mesa, pointed out that on Saturday afternoon, northbound on Fairview Road, the intersection of the 405 Freeway, traffic was backed up further than any peak hour he observed. He said that intersections are impacted by the Fairgrounds in this area more than any development being done in any other part of town. He mentioned that he did not see the Fairgrounds or the State paying Costa Mesa any mitigation or impact fees to clean up these intersections. Mayor Buffa mentioned synchronizing the signals to have more traffic control at the Fairgrounds, and to continue efforts to get more freeway access into and out of the Fairgrounds. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, said that the EIR is inadequate because it does not address the Gisler Avenue bridge impact, or the five Mesa Verde streets on the Master Plan of arterial highways. He mentioned that the EIR should specifically address the impact of the bridge over the Santa Ana River connecting Gisler Avenue and Garfield Avenue and the impact on California Street, Gisler Street, Country Club Drive, Mesa Verde Drive, and Baker Street. Mr. Sherrick said that it is not proper to have the Gisler bridge on the General Plan if the EIR does not address it. The Principal Planner responded that specific impacts on the five streets can more effectively be done when the project is in place and designed. Mayor Buffa replied that to his knowledge there was no plan for a Gisler overcrossing, and that the bridge has been on the Master Plan of Highways since 1959, but this General Plan, as far as the Gisler Avenue bridge and the streets mentioned, does not propose any change in status. The City Manager said that should a policy be adopted by the Council to delete the Gisler Avenue overcrossing and downgrade the five streets in question, it would require an amendment to the Master Plan of Highways. He added that Costa Mesa would prepare a full environmental impact report before a deletion is made. Gene Hutchins, 1808 Kinglet Court, Costa Mesa, a member of the board of the Mesa Verde Homeowners Association, commented that they did a survey in the area and a sub- stantial percentage did not want Gisler Avenue shown on r 240 the Master Plan of Highways. Mayor Buffa said that the County wants the bridge, but it would be impossible in the foreseeable future for that bridge to happen because there are so many districts involved: Flood Control District, Federal Government, Water District, Sanitation Distict. He pointed out that the City does not lessen the changes of the bridge happening by taking it off the Master Plan of Highways, but the City would lose money. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, was not impressed by the money issue. He said that opening up the Gisler Avenue bridge for the benefit of Huntington Beach would cause another 19,000 cars to go down Gisler, and it should not be included in the General Plan. Mayor Buffa requested a report frcm staff on the latest action of Huntington Beach regarding the Gisler Avenue bridge. Alan Remington, 1164 Boise Way, Costa Mesa, spoke about the Santa Ana River and Bluff Road area. He mentioned the wildlife in that area and said that this should remain open space, and that there should be no Bluff Road at all. He pointed out that there is no EIR on this area, and he did not favor a marina or a 19th Street bridge. The City Manager responded that the aforementioned area is outside of the City's jurisdiction and from the base of the bluffs westerly is County area. He mentioned that Orange County is presently preparing their Local Coastal Plan which will also include some environmental evaluation, and now would be the appropriate time to let the County know of opinions regarding the LCP. Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, spoke regarding the cost of borrowing money being passed on to our bi- monthly water bill. She said that the Water District had not taken into account the building intensities and densities of use proposed either under the proposed Gen- eral Plan or Alternative Two. She mentioned that the Water District gave credit to the City Manager and staff for providing them with information on which they based their development impact fees. Ms. Luymes said that comments with regard to the ability of the Sanitation District to handle waste water is a significant impact of the proposed densities and intensi- ties of use which are being considered. She questioned how the General Plan for densities and intensities of use could be adopted in light of the serious concerns raised with regard to the waste water situation. Council Member Genis commented: 1) that there is nothing that addresses subsidence under the geologic section, 2) under hydrology, she would like to see a better correlation of the Master Plan, 3) that 500 to 1,000 homeless people listed on page 67 seems too high, 4) under impacts on housing there is a discussion as to the number of units that will be reduced due to reductions in density; however, there is nothing on the number of units that will be reduced due to changes from residen- tial to commercial, and how much would housing demand be increased by the increased commercial development, 5) the City should examine what that jobs/housing imbalance will do to our regional transportation system and air quality as well, 6) that we are deleting certain segments from the bikeways plan and it appears that some of the deletions may discourage bikeriding, and impair the pos- sibility of using our bikeways as a functional transpor- tation system as opposed to just recreation, 7) that congested traffic can make seven times the amount of pollution that freeflow traffic makes with the same amount of cars, 8) that she would like to see an air quality study done on "killer intersections", such as, Fairview Road and Wilson Street, and, Fairview Road and Baker Street, 9) that she would like to see information on the 65 cnel included in the EIR, 10) that her comments on water would be the same as Ms. Luymes', 11) that it might be appropriate to address the Steering Committee's alternative which has some changes in use. Mayor Buffa requested that the City Manager include the modification of the bike plan on page 94. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded Staff to Prepare by Council Member Genis, and carried 4-0, Vice Mayor Resolution Hornbuckle absent, to direct staff to prepare a resolu- tion, after responding to comments, certifying final EIR No. 1043. RECESS The Mayor declared a recess at 8:40 p.m., and the meeting reconvened at 8:50 p.m. Council Member Genis was absent. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Policy 131A Mayor Buffa, and carried 3-0, Council Member Genis and Adopted Vice Mayor Hornbuckle absent, to adopt Policy 131A as proposed by staff in their memorandum dated November 17, 1989: Require appropriate site and environmental analy- ses for future fire and police station site locations or for the relocation or closure of existing fire and police facilities. Council Member Council Member Genis returned to the meeting. Returns MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Policy 147 Council Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, Vice Mayor Horn - Adopted buckle absent, to adopt Policy 147 as proposed by staff in their memorandum dated November 17, 1989: Land uses permitted by the General Plan which generate high traffic volumes should be located near major transportation cor- ridors and public transit facilities to minimize vehicle use, congestion and delay. A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council Member Glasgow, to adopt Policy 176A as proposed by staff in their memorandum dated November 17, 1989. The item was then trailed until later. Regarding Policy 154, the Principal Planner said that when the final land use intensity is determined in the traffic model, a list of specific intersections by name will'be included. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, pointed out that Council Member Genis had asked in a former meeting to have the nine intersections in Table 22, page 138, detailed showing future projects which will cause deficiencies. It was Mr. Sherrick's recol- lection that the staff had been instructed to list projects causing excessive ICUs. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Amended Policy Council Member Amburgey, and carried 3-1, Mayor Buffa 154 Adopted voting no, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle absent, to approve amended Policy 154: Attempt to maintain or improve mobil- ity within the City to achieve a standard level of service not worse than Level of Service "D" at all inter- sections under the sole control of the City with the exception of the following intersections for which Level of Service "D" cannot be feasibly obtained: (Intersec- tions and Level of Service to be listed upon final General Plan adoption.) (Amendment underlined.) Vice Mayor Arrived Vice Mayor Hornbuckle arrived at the meeting at 9:10 p.m. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Policy 154A Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy Adopted 154A: Cooperate with the State Department of Transpor- tation to maintain or improve mobility within the City to achieve a standard level of service no worse than Level of Service "D" at all intersections under state control with the exception of the following intersections for which Level of Service "D" cannot be feasibly obtained. (Intersections and Level of Service to be listed upon final General Plan adoption.) A discussion followed regarding Policy 156, development phasing. George Sakioka, Sakioka Fauns, said it was mentioned that occupancy of buildings shall not be released until fourth phase has been implemented and asked that "imple- ment" be clarified. The Principal Planner said that it was the intent that certain improvements come on line together, and Vice Mayor Hornbuckle clarified that the Principal Planner said that the required improvements would be completed rather than just begun. Council Member Genis has a problem with this regarding the collection of money for developers fees and putting them in a fund collecting interest to implement the improvement which was supposed to be done and would like to see something physically done as quickly as possible once the money is received. In response to Malcolm Ross's, C. J. Segerstrcm & Sons, 3315 Fairview Road, Costa Mesa, question about what happens to those projects which have contracts which are interrelated with Caltrans, the Principal Planner said that is the reason traffic studies are required for each project, such as, the overall study on the General Plan, and a phase two and three traffic study to identify what specific mitigation measures are required for that par- ticular set of buildings. Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, questioned the building of a residential or commercial project which will increase the traffic dramatically and then waiting to have improvements in place, impacting people for a long period of time. Jay Humphrey, 1620 Sandalwood Street, Costa Mesa, spoke about the adverse impacts of the Gisler Avenue bridge on the community. He suggested that the City consider each development individually and no building permits be issued until required improvements are ccmpleted. 1 Tony Petros, LSA Associates, Incorporated, 1 Park Plaza, Suite 500, Irvine, commented on how improvements are brought about: builder submits an application, environ- mental assessment is made, the impacts are identified, working drawings are prepared, and appropriate mitiga- tions are recommended at that time which show the magni- tude of any improvement that is made. He said that when a project is approved with a list of mitigations, there are grading and building permits, and construction pro- ceeds, as well as roadway improvements and other improve- ments. He said that it seems unreasonable to hold up a building when the impact has not been identified and appropriate mitigation has not been even laid out in drawings when the project is approved. Council Member Genis pointed out that part of the build- ing approval process is to identify the impact and appropriate mitigations, and she was not sure how the building was approved when the impact was not identified. She asked if a developers inconvenience was more impor- tant than 90,000 citizens being inconvenienced. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle commented that the last discussion focused around new phases not being approved until the previous phase was completed, so if there is a four phase project, approval of the third phase would not be approved until the second phase was completed. Gene Hutchins, 1808 Kinglet Court, Costa Mesa, commented that the Steering Committee wanted the mitigations in place before occupancy happened. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 156 Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy Adopted 156: Maintain balance between land use and circulation systems by phasing new development to levels which can be accommodated by roadways existing or planned to exist at the time of project completion of each phase of the project. (Addition underlined.) The Deputy City Manager/Development Services in answer to Council Member Genis's question clarified that there are two forms of occupancy in the City: Occupancy of buildings can be taken as completion certificate, or a tenant improvement occupancy. He gave an example of three buildings being finished, but there is not the need yet for traffic improvement until the tenants start coming into the building. He said that these situations are closely monitored. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Amended Policy Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 4-1, Council Member 128 Adopted Glasgow voting no, to adopt amended Policy 128: Encour- age and foster the maintenance and development of Cul- tural Arts programs and organizations in the community, thereby giving all citizens, regardless of age or income, accessibility to the arts in various forms including dance, theatre, music and the visual arts. (Amendment underlined.) Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, commented that the Steering Committee recommendation for Policy 157 puts the emphasis both emotionally and financially on improvement of traffic. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Policy 157 Adopted Council Member Amburgey, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy 157: Continually upgrade traffic controller equipment to optimize signal efficiency. :b 7 244 MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 158 Adopted Council Member Amburgey, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy 158, as recommended by the Planning Commission and Steer- ing Committee: Work closely with the State of California and other government agencies to control traffic -related impacts of uses on State- or other agency -owned land (i.e., Fairgrounds, Swap Meet, Amphitheatre, Orange Coast College, etc.). Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, said that the Steering Committee received many comments regarding Policy 158A which were site specific regarding deletion of Gisler Avenue, 19th Street, and Bluff Road from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, stated that the Mesa Verde area is a low density area and there is little, if any, traffic law enforcement; therefore, they depend on the arterial traffic being kept on the arterials, namely, Adams Avenue and Harbor Boule- vard. He said that Country Club Drive is increasing to 17,000 vehicles a day and would create a commuter volume of LOS "D" in a residential area. A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey to deny Policy 158A as recommended by the Planning Commission and Steering Committee. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Hornbuckle, seconded Amended Policy by Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-1, Council Mem- 158A Adopted ber Amburgey voting no, to adopt amended Policy 158A as recommended by the Planning Commission: ("Work closely with and" deleted) Encourage Orange County to delete the Gisler Avenue crossing of the Santa Ana River and Bluff Road from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. (Addition underlined.) MOTION A'motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by New Policy Mayor Buffa, carried 5-0, to adopt a new Policy 158F: 158F Adopted Pursue with the County of Orange and all other affected agencies an east west crossing of the Santa Ana River north of the I-405 Freeway. In answer to a comment by Scott Williams, 3465 Santa Clara Circle, Costa Mesa, Mayor Buffa said that it was the intent to have an overcrossing which presently allows Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley people to get on the San Diego Freeway, and in the future, use the 57 Freeway at a location north of the I-405. A discussion followed regarding Policy 158B as recom- mended by the Steering Committee. Mayor Buffa in response to comments by Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, said that there is an off -ramp right now to the Fairgrounds with the extension of the 55 Freeway that will give traffic a direct route via Mesa Drive to the Fairgrounds; it will not be exclusively for the Fairgrounds, southbound traffic will be able to continue. Mr. Korando stated that an exclusive off -ramp was desired by the Steering Committee. In answer to Council Member Genis's question regarding the status of the on-ramp to the Orange County Fair- grounds, the City Manager said that Caltrans's current 5 plan is to have an on-ramp just north of Fair Drive. Jay Humphrey, 1620 Sandalwood Street, Costa Mesa, said that if we have an off- and on-ramp system which allows people back on the general City streets, as soon as they back up the first turn north, they are going to start finding ways back to the City. Council Member Amburgey commented that the Orange County Fairgrounds have made application to the State for an off- and on-ramp to the Fairgrounds. The Public Services Director commented that Caltrans did look at the situation and one of the things which compli- cates having a direct off -ramp into the Fairgrounds is the eventual construction of the connector to the west- bound 73 Freeway, and the southbound 55 Freeway, which is a flyover connector and as the connector joins the southbound 55, it will rise approximately 10 to 12 feet as it crosses Mesa Drive. He said that a third tier would be needed for an exclusive off -ramp for the Fair- grounds. Council Member Genis suggested making a left -turn only out of the Fairgrounds. The City Manager in answer to a question from Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, said that there is a slip ramp which comes out from the 55 Freeway southbound which has an off -ramp for the Mesa Drive entrance. Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, mentioned that even though we may not be coordinating with Caltrans right away, they should be encouraged to do the analysis and look at it on a broader scale. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded Amended Policy by Council Member Genis, and carried 4-1, Council Mem- 158B Adopted ber Amburgey voting no, to adopt amended Policy 158B: ("Immediately coordinate with" deleted.) Encourage work toward the provision of an off -ramp and on-ramp from the southbound 55 Freeway directly into and out of the Orange County Fairgrounds. (Additions underlined.) In answer to Council Member Amburgey's question regarding Policy 158C as recommended by the Steering Committee, Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, said that the downgrade rationale was so that in the future there would be less of an impact on the streets involved. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow and seconded Amended Policy by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 4-1, Council Member 158C Adopted Amburgey voting no, to adopt Policy 158C as recommended by the Steering Committee: ("Work closely with and" deleted.) Encourage Orange County to downgrade Mesa Verde Drive, Baker Street west of Harbor Boulevard, and Gisler Avenue ("and Arlington" deleted.) to a designation less than a commuter highway in the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (Additions underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Amended Policy Council Member Genis, and carried 5-0, to adopt amended 158D Adopted Policy 158D: To help buffer residential neighborhoods, provide drought -resistant landscaped medians and green belts along major roadways, arterials, highways, and freeways adjacent to residential uses in the City. (Amendment underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded Policy 158E by Council Member Genis, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy Adopted 158E as recommended by the Steering Committee: Improve east -west circulation through the Redevelopment Area and avoid the closure of east -west connectors. RECESS The Mayor declared a recess at 10:30 p.m., and the meet- ing reconvened at 10:45 p.m. The Mayor presented Goal VI: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide for standard service levels at signalized intersections by constructing capacity improvements for all feasible modes of circulation and implementing traffic demand reduction programs, thereby creating a more energy efficient transportation system. A discussion followed regarding the policies listed under Goal VI. Mayor Buffa mentioned the metered ramp at Harbor Boule- vard southbound which blocks the intersection, and requested that staff contact Caltrans regarding this meter timing. Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, said that Policy 161A recommended by the Steering Committee came about as a result of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee who wanted a specific plan done to ensure that the extension of Route 55 would be compatible with the Redevelopment Area. Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, commented that Policy 162A recommended by the Steering Committee was suggested in response to a meeting which he attended with the City of Costa Mesa's Transportation Commission. He said that they made recommendations to form a policy to restrict heavy truck traffic which was so successful during the Olympics. Mr. Korando stated that in Policy 164, the words "where feasible" were omitted to make it more forceful. Mayor Buffa mentioned that it would take State legisla- tion to limit truck traffic, and that there is much interest in it. The City Attorney commented that he had participated in a feasiblity study in Los Angeles, and that Los Angeles has spent almost $350,000.00 to come up with a program to reduce truck traffic during peak periods. He said that it would take State legislation to create truck corridors for truck traffic areas. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Amended Goal VI Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 4-1, Council Member Adopted Glasgow voting no, to adopt amended Goal VI: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide for standard service levels at signalized intersections by construct- ing capacity improvements for various modes of circula- tion, adopting land use intensities commensurate with planned circulation improvements, and implementing traf- fic demand reduction programs, thereby creating a more energy efficient transportation system. (Amendment underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Objective VI -A Council Member Genis, and carried 5-0, to adopt Objective Adopted VI -A: To provide standard service levels by constructing and/or enhancing capacity of the master planned circula- tion system of freeways and arterial highways. y24 7 A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Council Member Genis, to adopt Policy 159: Coordinate with Caltrans to construct access and mainline improve- ments along I-405, both in the City of Costa Mesa and in adjacent cities. SUBSTITUTE MOTION A substitute motion was made by Council Member Hornbuckle, Amended Policy seconded by Council Member Genis, and carried 3-2, Coun- 159 Adopted cil Members Amburgey and Glasgow voting no, to adopt amended Policy 159: Coordinate with Caltrans and adja- cent cities to construct access and mainline improvements along I-405, both in the City of Costa Mesa and in adjacent cities. (Amendment underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Transportation Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy Commission 160, as recommended by the Transportation Commission: Policy 160 Adopted Coordinate with Caltrans, Orange County Transportation Commission, John Wayne Airport, the County of Orange, and the Transportation Corridors Agency to complete and improve the interchanges of Route 73 (the San Joaquin Hills Freeway) with Route 55 (the Costa Mesa Freeway), and Route I-405 (the San Diego Freeway). MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Anburgey, seconded Transportation by Council Member Genis, and carried 5-0, to adopt Commission Policy 161 as recommended by the Transportation Commis - Policy 161 Adopted sion: Coordinate with Caltrans to complete extension of Route 55 (the Costa Mesa Freeway) from 19th Street to the southern City boundary, incorporating a transition back into Newport Boulevard north of 15th Street/Indus- trial Way. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Anburgey, seconded Delete Policy by Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to delete 161A Location Policy 161A from its present location in the policies and direct staff to decide where this policy would more appropriately fit. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Policy 162 Adopted Council Member Amburgey, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy 162: Coordinate with Caltrans to implement a freeway congestion incident detection and management program. This program may involve the restriction of heavy truck traffic to nonpeak periods. A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow to approve Policy 162A. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Amended Policy Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to adopt amended 162A Adopted Policy 162A: ("Conduct a" delete) Consider the feasibi- lity ("study to" delete) of restricting heavy truck traf- fic to nonpeak periods on City streets. (Amendment underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 163 Adopted Council Member Glasgow,°and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy 163: Coordinate with the Orange County Transportation Commission and with adjacent jurisdictions to improve signal timing and coordination along major arterials. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Amended Policy Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 3-2, Mayor Buffa and 164 Adopted Council Member Amburgey voting no, to adopt amended Policy 164: Coordinate concept design, final engineer- ing, and construct improvements to provide peak period intersection operation not worse than LOS "D", ("where feasible" deleted), at intersections under the sole control of the City, except at the following intersec- tions: (List intersections at final General Plan adop- tion.) (Additions underlined.) MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 166 Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy Adopted 166: Pursue agreements with Caltrans to interconnect off -ramp signals with the City's master signalized inter- section system. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 166A Mayor Buffa, and carried 5-0, to adopt Policy 166A: Adopted Continue to work with Caltrans to synchronize and coor- dinate traffic signals on arterials at intersections con- trolled by Caltrans. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Policy 167 Adopted Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-1, Council Member Genis voting no, to adopt Policy 167: Develop a method- ology for forecasting trip generation for mixed-use developments. MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Policy 167A Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 3-2, Mayor Buffa and Adopted Council Member Genis voting no, to adopt Policy 167A: Encourage the City Council to support the 20 -year Trans- portation Plan prepared by the Orange County Transporta- tion Commission. The Mayor announced that the regular Redevelopment Agency meeting scheduled for January 10, 1990, would begin at 5:30 p.m., and at the conclusion of that meeting, the adjourned City Council meeting would convene. ADJOURNMENT At 11:40 p.m., the Mayor adjourned the meeting to Wednes- day, January 10, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Cham- bers of City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, to continue the public hearing for the General Plan Review Program. Mayor of the Cit Costa Mesa ATTEST: ity Clerk of the City of Costa esa