Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/18/1990 - Adjourned City Council Meeting1 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF COSTA MESA APRIL 18, 1990 The City Council of -the City of Costa Mesa, California, met in adjourned regular session April 18, 1990, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. The meeting was duly and regularly ordered adjourned from the adjourned regular meeting of March 22, 1990, and copies of the Notice of Adjournment were posted as required by law. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, followed by the Pledge of Alle- giance to the Flag, and Invocation by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle. ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Peter Buffa Vice Mayor Mary Hornbuckle Council Member Ory Amburgey Council Member Sandra Genis Council Member Ed Glasgow COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Manager Allan Roeder City Attorney Thomas Kathe Deputy City Manager/Develop- ment Services Donald Lawn Public Services Director William Morris City Clerk Eileen Phinney Principal Planner R. Michael Robinson Senior Planner Alice Angus Associate Planner Kimberly Brandt ORAL Linda Williams, 3465 Santa Clara Circle, Costa Mesa, COMMUNICATIONS Treasurer of the North Costa Mesa Homeowners Associa- tion, summarized the results of a survey taken by the North Costa Mesa homeowners regarding the proposed General Plan, a copy Homeowners Survey of which was -distributed to each Council Member: There were 2,300 surveys delivered to residences north of Baker Street, from Harbor Boulevard to Bear Street north of the San Diego Freeway. Surveys were also delivered between -Harbor Boulevard and the Corona del Mar Freeway. Approximately five percent responded. Item 1: Key elements of the General Plan should be placed on the ballot for the next election.. 95.3 percent agreed. Item 2: Adopt the Steering Committee's recommended plan. 74.75 percent agreed. Item 3: 100 percent wanted to preserve the suburban character of the City. 93.6 percent agreed with having the General Plan restrict new apartments in the City until their ratio approximates the Countywide average of apartments. 459 Item 5: Building height limits for area north of the I-405 Freeway and east of Bear Street. 6.2 percent - no limit 19.47 percent - 15 stories or less 23.89 percent - 12 stories or less 43.36 percent - 6 stories or less 7.08 percent - other Item 7: Apartment density near the Performing Arts Center (including density bonus). 0 - 50 units/acre 9.43 percent - 35 units/acre 32.08 percent - 23 units/acre 51.89 percent - 20 units/acre 6.6 percent - other Council Member Amburgey requested a copy of the survey responses, and Mrs. Williams agreed to provide that information. Limited Mixed Carey Ward, 126 East 19th Street, Costa Mesa, was inter - Use ested in the City's allowing small projects which would give an individual the opportunity to live on his prop- erty and having an office in the front, or having a store downstairs and an apartment upstairs. He asked if any consideration had been given to this concept. Mayor Buffa responded that Council is interested in considering that type of limited mixed use but not as part of the General Plan process. PUBLIC HEARING The Mayor opened the public hearing, continued from the GP -89-02 meeting of March 22, 1990, to discuss the General Plan General Plan Review Program: Review Program General Plan Amendment GP -89-02: Proposed land use building intensity standards. Proposed land,use element map amendments. Amendments to the Master Plans of Highways and Bikeways. Final recommendations on remaining General Plan topics. i The following communications were received: Letter from George M. K. Sakioka, Sakioka Farms, 14850 Sunflower Avenue, Santa Ana, concerning the Urban Center Mixed Use area north of the I-405 Freeway and east of Bristol Street. Survey from the North Costa Mesa Homeowners Associa- tion. Letter from Richard Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, addressing the Austin -Foust Associates report dated March 2, 1990, regarding Intersection Shares Analysis. The Principal Planner referenced his memorandum and attachments dated April 16, 1990, concerning Revised Land Use Description Text; Site 13 - Newport Boulevard; Request for Clarification regarding Site 21 (east side of Newport Boulevard between 16th and 17th Streets); Fairview/Wilson Intersection Shares Analysis; and amendments to the Master Plans of Highways and Bikeways. The Principal Planner gave a brief description of the new land use designations for the major properties in north Costa Mesa: Urban Center Mixed Use. Limited to that area of the City north of the -San Diego Freeway and east of Bristol Street which includes South Coast Plaza Town Center, The Lakes mixed-use project, Transpacific Metro Center, and the remaining vacant land of the Sakioka Fauns property. Residential density within the overall building intensity limit would be up to 50 units per acre; the maximum allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for other appropriate uses is 1.15. Regional Commercial. Limited to the existing South Coast Plaza site and the Crystal Court expansion generally located north of the San Diego Freeway off Bristol and Bear Streets. Maximum allowable FAR is 0.70. Urban Center Commercial. Limited to the Arnel Development Metro Pointe project located north of the San Diego Freeway and west of Bear Street. Future development is governed by a previous General Plan Amendment, two vesting tract maps, and a development agreement. Maximum allowable FAR is 1.15. Business Park Mixed Use. Limited to agricultural lands north of the San Diego Freeway between Fairview Road and Harbor Boulevard. This includes the 94 -acre site known as the Segerstrom Home Ranch and the adjoining 8 -acre property occupied by the Segerstrom home site, corporate offices, and farm buildings. Maximum allowable FAR is 0.47. Council Member Genis asked for clarification of the provision which allows combining or transferring trip budgets. The Principal Planner explained that these combinations and/or transfers shall only be allowed between contiguous Traffic Analysis Zones based on their meeting the requirements contained in the General Plan Errata. Revised Land Use The Mayor invited comments concerning Revised Land Use Descriptions Text Descriptions (Attachment No. 1, memorandum dated April 16, 1990). Gene Hutchins, 1808 Kinglet Court, Costa Mesa, member of the General Plan Steering Committee, referred to Urban Center Mixed Use, and asked about the amount of square footage to be developed, and the FAR for the existing development in this area. The Principal Planner responded that at build -out, the FAR would be 1.15; presently, the FAR is approximately 1.0. He explained that square footage for future build -out depends upon the actual mix and type of uses. The Principal Planner reported that the only undeveloped parcels are the two Sakioka Farm lots containing 73 acres, and a portion of the Transpacific Development. site. Responding to a question from Mr. Hutchins regarding the Regional Commercial designation, the Principal Planner stated that the FAR applies to both South Coast .1'462 MOTION Approved Text for Urban Center Mixed Use MOTION/Approved Text for Regional Commercial MOTION Approved. Text for Urban Center Commercial Plaza and Crystal Court as a total, and the Traffic ;Model assumes an 8 to 10*percent growth factor for this area. Mr. Hutchins asked about the difference in FARs between Business Park Mixed Use (Home Ranch site) and the desig- nation of Industrial Park that exists for the areas ,north and west of Home Ranch. The Principal Planner responded that the Industrial Park FAR was approved at .45, and .47 FAR is proposed for Business Park Mixed Use. Mark Korando, 582'Park Drive, Costa Mesa, asked for clarification of the Business Park Mixed Use percentages shown on Page 7 of the April 16 document because it shows a total of 120 percent. Malcolm Ross, C. J. Segerstrom and Sons, 3315 Fairview Road, Costa Mesa, pointed out that the 20 percent shown for single-family attached and single-family detached is an "either/or" situation. Malcolm Ross, C. J. Segerstrom and Sons, advised that in the Regional Commercial designation (South Coast Plaza and Crystal Court), there are five Traffic Analysis Zones, some of which enter individual stores or leaseholds, and if trip budgets were not transfer- able between these zones, severe problems would arise in regard to the use of the property. He stated that the same situation exists at Town Center. Council Member Genis asked if there were information on the Average Lily Trips (ADT) for Urban Center Mixed Use and Business Park Mixed Use, especially the latter. The Principal Planner responded that the ADT was lower in the new categories by approximately 4 to 6 percent. A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Council Member Glasgow, to approve the text for the Urban Center Mixed Use designation. Council Member Genis opposed the motion based on the high cost of improvements required in certain areas for the proposed development. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle stated that she would not support the motion because the building intensity was too high. The motion by Council Member Amburgey carried 3-2, Council Members Hornbuckle and Genis voting no. On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 5-0, the text for the Regional Commercial designation was approved. A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Council Member Glasgow, to approve the text for the Urban Center Commercial designation. Council Member Genis had several questions regarding Phase IV of the Arnel Metro Pointe project. The Principal Planner responded that a hotel and 150,000 square feet of commercial use was planned for the remaining acreage. The Associate Planner reported that the site contains a total of 300,000 square feet. Council Member Genis stated that she would oppose the motion based on this information. The motion by Council Member Amburgey carried 3-2, Council Members Hornbuckle and Genis voting no. 1 MOTION/Approved On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by Text for Business Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0, the text for Park Mixed Use Business Park Mixed Use was approved. Site 13 - Newport The Principal Planner referred to the data contained Boulevard in Attachment No. 2 (memorandum of April 16) for Site 13, Newport Boulevard, and reported on staff's recom- mendations. In conjunction with his report, the Associate Planner provided the densities for each property: Amend the land use designation from Neighborhood. Commercial to Medium Density Residential: Area 1 - 113, 117, 119 East 23rd Street (three lots containing five dwelling units); 8 units/acre, 18.5 units/acre, and 14 units/acre, respectively. Area 2 - 111 (three dwelling units) and 119 Cecil Place (one single-family detached unit); 15.3 units/ acre and 5.2 units/acre, respectively. Area 3 - 112 and 118 East 22nd Street (two lots with three dwelling units-); 5.9 units/acre and 11.6 units/acre, respectively. Amend the land use designation from Neighborhood Commercial to High Density Residential: Area 4 - 2110 Newport Boulevard, 116 and 120 East 21st Street, and 2127, 2131, 2133, 2135, 2137 Elden Avenue (three apartment projects with a total of 128 dwelling units); -34.9 units/acre, 25.4 units/ acre, and 31 units/acre, respectively. Area 5 - 2060 Newport Boulevard (mobile home park with 53 units); 18.5 units/acre. Gene Hutchins, Steering Committee member, stated that the committee recommended Medium Density Residential for Area 5. Mark Korando spoke about the properties near Area 4, commenting that there was discussion in the past to rezone some of the 'R2 lots on the east side to Rl. The Principal Planner -responded that it is staff's intention to process a General Plan Amendment for those sites. Scott Williams,- 3465 Santa Clara Circle, Costa Mesa, supported Mr. Korando's remarks about certain east side R2 sites being rezoned to R1; however, he wanted it addressed now because he contended that processing a General Plan Amendment may take from one to five years. MOTION/Approved A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle," seconded by Medium Density Council Member Glasgow, to approve Medium Density Resi- Residential for dential-for Areas 1, 2, and 3. The motion carried 4-1, Areas 1, 2, and 3 Mayor Buffa voting no. MOTION/Approved A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by High Density - Council Member Genis, to approve High Density Residen- Residential for tial for Area 4. The motion carried 4-1, Mayor Buffa Area 4 voting no. Motion to Approve A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Medium Density Council Member Genis, to approve Medium Density Resi- for Area 5 Failed dential for Area 4. The motion failed to carry 3-2, to Carry Council Members Buffa, Amburgey, and Glasgow voting no. r y ` i-1464 MOTION/Approved A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded High Density Resi- by Council Member Glasgow, approving High Density Resi- dential for Area 5 dential for Area 5. The motion carried 3-2, Council Members Buffa and Hornbuckle voting no. Site 21 - Newport The Principal Planner requested clarification of the Boulevard between option selected for Site 21, the east side of Newport 16th and 17th Boulevard between 16th and 17th Streets. As indicated Streets in his memorandum of April 16, he explained that staff MOTION ;must know if Council's "approval" meant redesignation Approved General ;from Commercial Center to General Commercial, or reten- Commercial Except tion of Commercial Center for this portion of the site for Specific Plan :as recommended by the Planning Commission. Area; Four Stories Richard Dodd, 1670 Newport Boulevard, Costa Mesa, spoke Stipulated for in support of the Planning Commission's recommendation Specific Plan Area to retain the Commercial Center designation and Specific Plan SP -85-01A which was adopted in 1986. Gene Hutchins, Steering Committee member, stated that the input received.by the committee indicated a prefer- ence to retain .50 FAR (General Commercial), and that buildings higher than 3 or 4 stories were undesirable (Categories 4 and 5 of the Specific Plan allow 5 stories with a maximum height of 60 feet). Mayor Buffa recalled Council's having adopted a height limit Citywide south of the San Diego Freeway. The Principal Planner stated that the height limit adopted by Council was 4 stories; therefore, Categories 4 and 5 of the Specific Plan would have to be adjusted to be consistent with the General Plan. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle mentioned that the Specific Plan was developed to provide guidelines for property owners because of the imminent construction of the 55 Freeway. Council Member Genis was of the opinion that if a traffic study had been done in 1986 in conjunction with the Specific Plan, it would not adequately address present traffic conditions. Motion to Retain Council Member Genis made a motion to restate Council's General Commercial previous action changing the land use designation from Died for Lack of Commercial Center to General Commercial with a .50 FAR. a Second The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle confirming Approved General redesignation of the site to General Commercial except Commercial Except for the area in Specific Plan SP -85-01A; modifying the for Specific Plan Specific Plan to reflect a.4 -story height limit; and Area; Four Stories stipulating that this action is contingent upon future Stipulated for traffic modeling showing that these numbers will work. Specific Plan Area The motion was seconded by Council Member Amburgey, and carried 4-1, Council Member Genis voting no. Fairview Road/ The Principal Planner stated that no action was required Wilson Street for the Fairview Road/Wilson Street Intersection Shares Analysis since it was merely an informational item. RECESS The Mayor declared a recess at 8:15 p.m., and the meet- ing reconvened at 8:20 p.m. Master Plan of The Public Service Director presented amendments to the Highways Master Plan of Highways and stated that a new Traffic Model was developed specifically to address the General Plan, not only the existing improvements, but also the future growth of the City to the year 2010. He reported .,_4 65 that the model includes areas outside the City limits, some of which are in Santa Ana, Newport Beach, and unincorporated Orange County. He advised that the assumptions that were used included an integration of the existing County traffic model to account for regional traffic which passes through the City. The Public Services Director reported on the assumptions made in the Traffic Model (Page 134 of the proposed General Plan): (1) Deleting the Gisler Avenue crossing of the Santa Ana River; (2) Deleting the Wilson Street crossing of the Santa Ana River, and the associated widening of Canyon Drive; (3) Deleting the Bluff Road segment between Victoria and Wilson Streets; and (4) Downgrading the Del Mar Avenue/University Drive segment east of Newport Boulevard. The Director pointed out the importance of having these proposed changes coincide with the County's Master Plan of Highways. He mentioned that in August, 1989, the Mayor forwarded a letter to the County, along with the proposed amendments to the Master Plan of Highways specifically requesting that the County informally approve deletion of the Wilson Street and Gisler Avenue crossings, deletion of the Bluff Road segment, and several other minor changes. The Director stated that in its response, the County did support all changes requested by the City except for the Gisler Avenue crossing. He mentioned that during the General Plan Policy sessions, staff was directed to work with County staff in an attempt to have the Gisler Avenue crossing deleted from the County Master Plan of Highways. In regard to the County's deleting the Wilson Street crossing of the Santa Ana River, the Director stated that the County cannot formally act on that until the City has acted. He mentioned that County's proposed Master Plan of Highways includes deletion of the Wilson Street crossing, deletion of the Bluff Road segment, and downgrading Del Mar Avenue. The Public Services Director reviewed several key amend- ments in the City's Master Plan of Highways: Include Susan Street from Sunflower Avenue to South Coast Drive (a southerly extension of the existing Susan Street in Santa Ana). Upgrade Bristol Street from the I-405 Freeway south to Baker Street so that there would be four lanes north- bound and three lanes southbound. Change the classification of 18th Street from Park Avenue to Newport Boulevard from a commuter highway to a secondary highway (widen to four lanes). Upgrade Wilson Street at the 55 Freeway to include a freeway overpass (construction has been completed). Upgrade Wilson Street from a secondary to a primary highway at the Fairview Road intersection. ' 46U Change the classification of Main Street, Sunflower Avenue to the 55 Freeway, to a major highway (six lanes, three in each direction) to match the designa- tions in the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine). The Public Services Director recommended minor changes to some of the intersections on Pages 20 and 21 (Table 21) Attachment 5, of the April 16 memorandum: No. 7, Harbor Boulevard/19th Street: Delete "removal of southbound right -turn lane". No. 33, Bristol Street at Anton Boulevard - Add word- ing which would allow any improvement comparable to the grade separation. No. 90, Newport Boulevard northbound and Del Mar Avenue - Remove this intersection from the list because of the deletion of University Drive from the County's Master Plan of Highways, and the proposed downgrading of Del Mar Avenue in the City's Master Plan of Highways. The Public Services Director reviewed the proposed downgrades shown on Table 21, Page 21: Downgrade 17th Street from Placentia Avenue to Superior Avenue from a primary to a secondary highway. Downgrade Orange Avenue from 17th Street to 19th Street from a secondary to a commuter highway. Downgrade 22nd Street east of the 55 Freeway from a primary to a secondary highway. He reported that these downgrades have been informally approved by the County; however, the County will not take formal action until the City has approved the environmental document. He again mentioned that the only item at issue is the Gisler Avenue crossing of the Santa Ana River, and the last communication from the County indicated that there was no interest in removing this crossing from its Master Plan of Highways. The Principal Planner referred to the concerns expressed by property owners regarding the loss of parking spaces if three feet of right-of-way were required for improve- ment of Intersection 7, Harbor Boulevard/19th Street. He reported that three owners of property on the east side of Harbor Boulevard met with staff earlier in the day and proposed an innovative solution of having the City provide replacement parking. The Public Services Director completed his comments on the Master Plan of Highways by referring to Table 13A (Pages 25 - 29 of the April 16 document) which describes all right-of-way requirements if the proposed Master Plan of Highways and amendments were to be implemented. Council Member Genis requested cost data for the Bristol Street/Anton Boulevard crossing and the means of paying for it. The Public Services Director responded that one of the Conditions of Approval for the Plaza Towers project is upgrading the Bristol Street/Anton Boulevard intersection, and mentioned that this is the only inter- section which Council has not finalized in regard to the North Costa Mesa Arterial Project Area. He stated that 46f a consultant is developing mitigation measures which should be ready for Council's review within two to three months. Malcolm Ross, C. J. Segerstrom and Sons, agreed with the information provided by the Public Services Director. Council Member Glasgow asked about alternative improve- ments which staff would be suggesting for the above- mentioned intersection. The Public Services Director replied that one alternative to be studied is an at - grade triple left -turn, similar to those on Pacific Coast Highway in Newport Beach. Council Member Genis asked if parking would be reduced in those cases where additional right-of-way is needed. Malcolm Ross, C. J. Segerstrom and Sons, responded that in conjunction with the improvements for the south side of Sunflower Avenue between Bear and Bristol Streets, the loss of parking is only 17 spaces out of a total of approximately 10,000. He also mentioned that if there were further expansion of South Coast Plaza, it would require a parking structure; therefore, several thousand spaces would be added. Referencing the Bristol Street/ Anton Boulevard intersection, Mr. Ross indicated that with the triple left -turn at -grade proposal, there would be no net loss of parking. The Public Services Director reported that parking would not be affected by the improvements for the Bristol Street/Baker Street intersection; he had no information on how parking would be affected by the improvements for Intersection 91, Fairview Road/Wilson Street, which will require significant widening of Wilson Street. Council Member Genis questioned the need to add a south- bound right -turn lane at Intersection No. 96, southbound Newport Boulevard and Fairview Road, since the intersec- tion is operating at an acceptable level of .90 PM Peak Trip Rate and .76 AM Peak Trip Rate. Malcolm Ross commented that the forecast of .90 Peak Trip -Rates for the year 2010 definitely is not an absolute. The Mayor asked the Public Services Director to provide more information on the No. 96 intersection as to when and from whom the fees will be collected. Curt Herberts, 1932 Harbor Boulevard, Costa Mesa, representing himself and three other owners of property in the shopping center along the east side of Harbor Boulevard, north of 19th Street, stated that they are concerned about the loss of parking in conjunction with improvements for Intersection No. 7, Harbor Boulevard/ 19th Street. Mr. Herberts believed that their proposal to give up three feet of right-of-way in exchange for the City's acquiring the vacant parcel behind the shop- ping center would meet their parking needs. Larry Somers, 201 Shipyard Way, Suite No. 2, Newport Beach, representing the owners of the three lots at the northeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and 19th Street, 440-448 West 19th Street and 1902-1906 Harbor Boulevard, stated that these owners cannot afford to lose any more parking spaces. 6 468 ,Franklin Cole, 2482 Fairview Way, Costa Mesa, showed .transparencies of the County's Local Coastal Plan and ;spoke about a project being proposed south of the 19th Street extension between the Santa Ana River and the 'bluff line, which will have 2,806 residential units: 86 acres of medium density, 87 acres of medium/high ;density, and 64 acres of high density, most of which 'will back up to the Costa Mesa boundary. MOTION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council Additional Time Member Genis, and carried 4-1, Council Member Amburgey Permitted for voting no, Mr. Cole was permitted to speak for an Mr. Cole additional three minutes. Mr. Cole referred to the aforementioned Coastal Plan, pointing out the 19th Street bridge, and the circulation plan showing Bluff Road as a major arterial. He stated that residents are concerned about the high building intensity being proposed next to their homes. Mr. Cole reported that the City of Newport Beach and the County have been discussing the Sphere of Influence for this area, and the desire of the developer, West Newport Oil Company, to have the property annexed to the City of Newport Beach. Responding to Council Member Amburgey's question, Mr. Cole stated that the County's Local Coastal Plan shows Bluff Road extending to 19th Street. Mayor Buffa asked for clarification of inconsistencies in that Council was told that the County agreed to the deletion of Bluff Road from its Master Plan of Highways. The Public Services Director explained that the County has agreed to the deletion of Bluff Road between Victoria and Wilson Streets; however, the County has not agreed to deleting that portion of Bluff Road south of Victoria Street, in fact, the City's Traffic Model -takes that into consideration. During discussion, the Principal Planner advised Council that the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) determines the Sphere of Influence, and he believed that the area being discussed probably was determined to be in the City of Newport Beach's Sphere of Influence many years ago. Franklin Cole contended that there has not been a recent LAFCO ruling giving Newport Beach the right to annex the subject site. Mayor Buffa requested staff to contact LAFCO regarding the Sphere of Influence issue, stating that further action will be based on LAFCO's response. Dave Ruffell, 1922 Harbor Boulevard, Costa Mesa, refer- encing Intersection No. 7, Harbor Boulevard/19th Street, expressed his agreement with the plan to trade the shopping center frontage for parking at the rear of the buildings. Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, summarized his letter of April 3, 1990, which expresses his concern with the high traffic volumes in the City. Roy Pizarek, 1923 Whittier Avenue, Costa Mesa, repre- senting the Mesa West Homeowners Association, suggested that Council take action to delete Bluff Road from Victoria Street to 19th Street and the 19th Street crossing from the Master Plan of Highways. He stated that the Mesa West, Park Newport, and Newport Terrace Homeowners Associations have always opposed the 19th Street crossing because of its negative impact on the R1 community in that area. Mr. Pizarek stated that the 20 homes in the Transition Zone would be destroyed if the 19th Street crossing were to be completed. He mentioned that the RUDAT (Regional Urban Design Assist- ance Team) Study, which was completed several years ago for the Transition Zone, was strongly supported by the residents because it would have provided an opportunity for them to upgrade their properties. The Principal Planner mentioned that the RUDAT Study was mentioned during discussion of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and at that time, a decision was made to address this issue after the General Plan had been completed. Alan Remington, 1164 Boise Way, Costa Mesa, supported deletion of the 19th Street crossing and the Bluff Road extension. Bill Butler, 2946 Ceylon Drive-, Costa Mesa, urged Council to remove the 19th Street crossing from the Master Plan of Highways. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle was interested in knowing the position of the City of Huntington Beach regarding the 19th Street crossing, and the cost of the project for each agency involved. Mayor Buffa reported that the only concern expressed by the Carps of Engineers regarding the 19th Street cross- ing is the height of the bridge. Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, contended that Table 21, Proposed Amendments to the Master Plan of Highways, only addresses half the improvements which will be necessary to complete the Master Plan of High- ways by the year 2010— He stated that there are 75 intersection improvements to be completed, not including the North Costa Mesa Project Area or the I-405 Access Area. Mr. Korando stated that the General Plan does not address the cost of these improvements, and he believed this information should be made available to the citi- zens. Mr. Korando reported that based on feedback from the community, the Steering Committee recommended dele- tion of the Gisler Avenue, Wilson Street, and 19th Street crossings and Bluff Road from the Master Plan of Highways. Mayor Buffa mentioned that State law requires the City to make an estimate of needed improvements to the year 2010. Zan Harlich, 1016 West 19th Street, Costa Mesa, agreed with previous comments concerning the deletion of the 19th Street crossing from the Master Plan of Highways. Cheryl Kepler, 2046 Meadow View Lane, Costa Mesa, President of the Sea Bluff Canyon Village Homeowners Association, stated that the association has passed a resolution opposing development of the 19th Street crossing and Bluff Road because of the increased traffic which would result, the impact on the wetlands area, and devaluation of surrounding properties. :a € 7 0 Robert Laho, 914 West 19th Street, mentioned that there ,are bridges on.Coast Highway, Victoria Street, and 'Adams Avenue; therefore, additional crossings over the ,Santa Ana River are not needed. `Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, referred to Intersection No. 7, Harbor Boulevard/19th Street, 'stating that if any of the property owners on Harbor Boulevard contributed to a Parking District from which they are not deriving any benefits, the City should take that into consideration. As to Intersection No. 12, Newport Boulevard/18th Street, Ms. Luymes stated that ,the improvements are very much needed because it is one of the most dangerous intersections in the City. Ms. Luymes wanted to know who would pay for improvements for which there is no committed funding. Jeffrey Childs, 1139 Aviemore Terrace, Costa Mesa, Acting President of the Marina Highland Homeowners Association, and representative of the Friends of the Santa Ana River Wetlands, asserted that Mr. Dawes, Chief Engineer of the Orange County Sanitation District, Fountain Valley, stated that the 19th Street crossing would be extremely damaging to the future development of the County's sanitation needs. As to Bluff load, Mr. Childs stated that he talked to people at the County who claimed that without the City of Costa Mesa, Bluff Road from 19th Street to Victoria Street cannot be constructed because of the City's utility easement across that area. Motion to Grant A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by Five More Minutes Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to grant Mr. Childs five more to Mr. Childs minutes to speak. The motion failed to carry 3-2, Failed to Carry Council Members Buffa, Amburgey, and Glasgow voting no. MOTION A motion was made by Mayor Buffa, seconded by Vice Mayor Granted Two More Hornbuckle, to allow Mr. Childs to speak for two more Minutes to Mr. minutes. The motion carried 4-1, Council Member Childs Amburgey voting no. Mr. Childs spoke about the damage to the wildlife if the 19th Street crossing were constructed. Gene Hutchins, Steering Committee member, recommended that staff be directed to prepare a report which would include the cost of all. improvements and the source of funding. He also suggested that deletion of Bluff load and the 19th Street crossing be decided by the citizens through a ballot measure or by a professional survey. His last suggestion was to model the General Plan with- out the Bluff Road segment or the 19th Street crossing. Council Member Amburgey asked if it would be possible to include the 19th Street crossing based on the condi- tion that Bluff Road would be deleted in its entirety. The City Attorney commented that if Council decides not to fund these projects, they will not be built absent condemnation by the County. Mayor Buffa felt that the Gisler Avenue crossing would never be built because the agencies involved cannot come to an agreement. As to the 19th Street crossing and the Bluff Road segment, the Mayor stated that the down- side of removing these projects from the Master Plan is that the County is having financial problems and would use any excuse to withhold funds from the City. +.471 i Mayor Buffa suggested making a formal request to LAFCO to place that property south of the 19th Street exten- sion between the Santa Ana River and the bluff line (site of the proposed residential development) in the City of Costa Mesa's Sphere of Influence. Joy Laho, 914 West 19th Street, Costa Mesa, commented that the City of Newport Beach should not have been allowed to annex the back bay area, and wanted the City of Costa Mesa to be more active in annexing properties. Council Member Genis noticed that the map of the City indicates that Costa Mesa's boundary is on the other side of the Santa Ana River in the area of the proposed 19th Street crossing. The Principal Planner confirmed that the City's boundary is on the other side of the river. The City Attorney reported that if the County were serious about obtaining that property, it would have to condemn the entire right-of-way. Council Member Genis stated that it would be helpful to have more information on the proposed improvements for which there are no committed funds. She addressed the issue of the County's withholding funds if the City should delete certain improvements from its Master Plan, and suggested letting the voters decide if the City should retain the funds which are in excess of the Cann Limitation to construct necessary improvements. She also mentioned the possibility of using Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) funds. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle stated that she has consistently supported the 19th Street crossing because she felt it was necessary to improve traffic circulation; however, she has been reconsidering her position because of the new information presented this evening. MOTION Vice Mayor Hornbuckle made a motion to amend the Master Amended the Master Plan of Highways as.follows: (1) Delete the Gisler Plan of Highways Avenue crossing of the Santa Ana River; (2) Delete the Wilson Street crossing of the Santa Ana River and associated street widening; (3) Delete the 19th Street crossing of the Santa Ana River; (4) Delete Bluff Road north of 19th Street to its northerly terminus; and (5) Downgrade the Del Mar Avenue/University Drive seg - went east of Newport Boulevard. The motion was seconded by Council Member Genis. Council Member Amburgey opposed the motion because he preferred to attempt to delete Bluff Road in its entirety, frau Victoria Street to the Pacific Coast Highway; and if that could not be accomplished, he would support deleting the 19th Street crossing. Council Member Glasgow stated that he would like to have Bluff Road deleted without endangering the City's entitlement from the County; however, he believed it .would be best to direct staff to vigorously oppose the Bluff Road improvements and the Santa Ana River crossings at Gisler Avenue and 19th Street instead of openly defying the County's Master Plan of Highways. MOTION Mayor Buffa shared the sentiments of Council Member Mayor Authorized Glasgow and made a motion authorizing him to send a to Send Letter to letter to the County, which shall be reviewed by . the County Council, expressing the City's serious concerns regard- ing the proposed development in the lowlands, and requesting protection of the City's traffic circulation 472 system by deleting the 19th Street crossing, Bluff load, and the Gisler Avenue crossing from the County's Master Plan of Highways. The motion was seconded by Council Member Glasgow, and carried 5-0. ,Vice Mayor Hornbuckle announced that she would not be withdrawing her motion since it is not final action for the Master Plan of Highways, and it would send a strong message to the County regarding the serious concerns of the City. The original motion by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle carried 4-1, Council Member Glasgow voting no. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Approved Amendments Council Member Amburgey, approving the amendments to to the Master Plan the Master Plan of Highways contained in Table 21 of Highways with (Pages 20 and 21 of the April 16 document) with the Modifications following changes: Intersection No. -33, Bristol Street/Anton Boulevard - Along with grade separation, include "or comparable improvements". Delete Intersection 90, northbound Newport Boulevard and Del Mar Avenue. Intersection No. 7, Harbor Boulevard/19th Street - Change proposed improvement to read, "Remove north- bound right -turn lane"; directed staff to hold ongoing discussions with the property owners for the purpose of reaching a compromise on parking needs. Council Member Genis stated she would not be supporting the motion because of her -'opposition to improvements proposed for Intersection Nos. 7, 45, 46, 70, and 91, and stated her reasons. Council Member Council Member Amburgey left the Council Chambers at Amburgey Left 10:55 p.m. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle made a personal request to staff to pay special attention to those intersections men- tioned by Council Member Genis; and commented that presently, Intersection 91, Fairview Road/Wilson Street, without any additional development, is one of the most abominable intersections in the City. The motion carried 3-1, Council Member Genis voting no, Council Member Amburgey absent. RECESS The Mayor declared a recess at 11:00 p.m., and the meeting reconvened at 11:15 p.m. Council Member Amburgey was present when the meeting reconvened. Master Plan of The Public Services Director referred to the proposed Bikeways amendments to the Master Plan of Bikeways shown on Table 23 and Figure 30 (Pages 22, 23, and 24 of the April 16 document) and requested that Council adopt certain design criteria developed by the State Depart- ment of Transportation (CALTRANS). The Director stated that the City would be in conformance with new standards by increasing the bike path width from 8 to 10 feet, and increasing the structural section of asphalt bike paths so that maintenance vehicles can use those paths when maintaining any landscaping adjacent to the bikeways. The Public Services Director pointed out that there are 6 proposed deletions to the existing Master Plan of C Qr s, ' 47 3 Bikeways, 14 additions, and 2 amendments. He.stated that the Planning Commission recommended deleting the following amendments: No. 1 - Bear Street (Baker Street to Sunflower Avenue); No. 2 - Fairview Road (Baker Street to South Coast Drive); No. 5 - Paularino Avenue (Bear Street to Ludington Street); No. 6 - South Coast Drive (Cadillac Avenue to Susan Street; and No. 21 - Del Mar Avenue (Newport Boulevard to Santa Ana Avenue). Council Member Genis suggested retaining the bike trail on South Coast Drive, and ccmmented that more bike trails are needed north of the I-405 Freeway. Mark Korando, 582 Park Drive, was in favor of better bike trail access to South Coast Plaza, especially for the younger population who frequent that shopping center. He commented that the Gisler Avenue bike trail stops short of the Santa Ana River trail and he felt it should be extended so that the two trails connect. Scott Williams, 3465 Santa Clara Circle, stated that there is no room for a.bike trail on Sunflower Avenue between Fairview Foad and Bristol Street. Mr. Williams suggested constructing bike` -.trails near the new homes planned for South Coast. Plazi Drive. Jan Luymes, 592. Park Drive,,spoke about the many resi- dents who use bicycles as their primary means of transportation and the importance.of having the City provide safe routes for these citizens to commute to their work places. MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Approved Amendments Council Member Genis, to approve the Proposed Amendments to the Master Plan to the Master Plan of Bikeways as outlined on Table 23, of Bikeways with stipulating that Amendment Nos. l; 2, 3, 5, and 6 shall Modifications be retained; adding the bike lane on California Street from Gisler Avenue to Suburbia Park; and directing staff to investigate the possibility of adding to the Master Plan, that section of the off-road trail along Fairview Read between Gisler Avenue and Baker Street, and improv- ing it as an off-road bikeway. AMENDED MOTION At the request of Mayor Buffa, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle Deleted a Phrase amended her motion by deleting the phrase "until that from Amendment facility can be studied further" from Amendment No. 15, No. 15 Tanager Drive between Golf Course and Canary Drives. The motion carried 3-2, Council Members Amburgey and Glasgow voting no. COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Genis referred to an Urgency Ordinance COMMENTS which was discussed at the Council meeting of April 16, 1990, regarding building height and rooftop pools and Residential Zones decks in residential zones. She suggested that staff provide an Intent and Purpose clause when reviewing this Code section. r•, 7 v e, .474 Thanked Mr. Cole ;Council Member Glasgow thanked Franklin Cole for the for Information information he provided on the residential development being proposed in County territory near the City's boundary. Council Policy Council Member Amburgey reported on his being contacted No. 100-4 by "The Immigration Reform Law Institute", a private organization in Washington, D.C., regarding Council ;.Policy No. 100-4,'withholding grants from organizations ;providing services to illegal aliens. Council Member Amburgey stated that the institute had contacted HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) and cited ,case law on the direction HUD should be taking, a copy :of which he has received. Council Member Amburgey contended that if the information is accurate, it would appear that the City would be in violation of the Code if the policy were not enforced. He requested the City Attorney to review the case law and to provide Council with his legal opinion. He requested the City Manager to send copies of the data to each Council Member. LAFCO Vice Mayor Hornbuckle asked for confirmation that the Mayor would be sending a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) regarding the West Newport Oil Company property. The Mayor confirmed that a letter will be sent. ADJOURNMENT The Mayor declared the meet' adjourned at 11:50 p.m. _ Mayor of the City Costa Mesa ATTEST: i.ty Clerk of the City,of Costa Mdsa