Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
DEIR_SJHTC_PRESENTATION
n,ss'jM TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCIES William Woollett, Jr., Executive Director Foothill/Eastern Corridor Agency Chairman: Gaddi Vasquez Supervisor, 3rd District SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCY PRESENTATION ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEBRUARYr 1991 345 Clinton Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 7141557--3298 FAX 7141557-91 D4 Members., Anaheim Irvine Mission Viejo Orange San Clemente San Juan Capistrano Santa Ana Tustin Yorba Linda County of Orange San Joaquin Hills Corridor Agency Chairman: John Cox Newport Beach Members: Costa Mesa Dana Point Irvine Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Newport Beach San Clemente San Juan Capistrano Santa Ana County of Orange This report highlights the major issues of the San Joaquin Hills Corridor that have been discussed in the public hearings held February 14 and February 28, 1991. Included is a discussion regarding the need for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, its history, the description of the project, the Agency's response to' comments on the environmental issues, finance issues, the issues raised by the Environmental Protection Agency, and a review of the confluence and the no -project alternatives. TABLE OF CONTENTS Need for the Project 2 Project History 3 Project Description 5 Environmental Issues 5 Finance Plan and Issues 10 Issues Raised by Environmental Protection Agency 13 South End Connection Alternatives 17 No Project Alternative 18 Summary 18 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Map of Corridor 20 Exhibit 2: Transit/Reversible Lanes 21 Exhibit 3: Double Split Profile/Reversible HOV 22 Exhibit 4: Mainline Toll Plaza 23 Exhibit 5: Wildlife Crossings 24 Exhibit 6: Area of Benefit Land Use Survey 25 Exhibit 7: Map of Land Use 26 Exhibit 8: Long -Term Feasibility Analysis 27 Exhibit 9: 2010 Air Emissions 28 Exhibit 10: 'Regional, Population Growth Facts 29 Exhibit 11: Scope of EIS 30 Exhibit 12: Alternatives Evaluated 31 Exhibit 13: Graphic of Option 1 33 Exhibit 14: Graphic of Option 2 34 Exhibit 15: 1980 - 1990 Population Growth Rate 35 Exhibit 16: 2010 Population .36 THE NEED FOR THE PROJECT The primary objective of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is to alleviate existing and projected peak period traffic congestion on the regional circulation system and to minimize regional impacts through the use of the arterial highways. The San Joaquin Hills Corridor is included in the general plans of the County of Orange and the cities of Irvine, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, and San Juan Capistrano. It is a vital link in alleviating the present congestion .problems in south Orange County. Development activity in most of these jurisdictions, has -been approved and built, based on regional plans which balance development, transportation systems, and open space. If the no -project alternative is selected, conflicts would result between existing future land uses and congested arterial roadways: Traffic projections .indicate that if the corridor is not built, it will take a commuter one hour and fifteen minutes to travel from Laguna Niguel to the airport business area in the year 2010. Once the corridor is open; the same commute -.on the corridor will take 30 minutes, a time savings of 45 minutes, and even a'travel time savings of 30 minutes in the year 2010 for trips not on the corridor. The Southern California Association of Governments, otherwise known as SLAG, is the designated metropolitan planning organization under the Federal Clean Air Act. It is responsible for determining compliance of transportation projects with Federal and state clean air requirements. Members include Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Imperial Counties, and most of the cities within these counties. Major issues addressed by SCAG include growth management, regional mobility -and air quality. The SCAG Regional Mobility Plan states that for every 1,000 vehicles on the road today, there will be 1,420 tomorrow, that is to say, in the year 2010. The prognosis of SCAG is if nothing is done to improve the transportation system, these additional trips may bring traffic to a near halt on much of the regional system for .much of the day. The regional mobility plan emphasizes the use of various transportation strategies to resolve Southern California's mobility problems. The preferred strategy. of SCAG includes construction of the San Joaquin Hills Corridor, as well as a limited number of other .new facilities, transit .facilities, and modes that carry more than one person per vehicle. Space is being reserved on part of the corridor right of way to preserve future opportunities for transit and alternative mode options. The San Joaquin Hills Corridor is a critical component of the Regional Air Quality Management Plan to reduce future carbon monoxide emissions by easing congestion and bringing greater mobility to the region. 2 The corridor .meets the following objectives: (1) Eases congestion on regional and arterial roadways, reduces travel time on regional roadway networks; (2) Conserves energy by easing congestion; (3) Provides a balanced transportation system which can accommodate existing and committed growth; and (4) Implements regional air quality and transportation plans such as the SCAG regional mobility plan. PROJECT HISTORY The seed of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor was planted when CalTrans deleted the Pacific Coast Freeway from the state highway system 'in 1972 without satisfying the travel demand with a more environmentally sensitive route. That action triggered the County of Orange to step up and assess alternate land 'use patterns in southern Orange County. In 1915 through 1976, the County performed the Southeast Orange County Circulation Study, called SEOCCS, in cooperation with the cities in the south county. SEOCCS evaluated circulation systems needed to support various land use alternatives. These alternatives ranged from populations of 700,000 to 1.2 million people. In August 1976, the Orange County Board of Supervisors selected a- mid -range population alternative which was the basis for the county general plan amendments. The -San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor was added to the master plan. of arterial highways- as a result of decisions made from SEOCCS and its accompanying EIR 187-1 For the last 15--years, the Board of Supervisors and south county cities have based land use approvals on this decision .to include the corridor on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The County commenced Phase 1 of a two-phase. route location study for San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor in 1977. This study and EIR considered 28 route alternatives, as well as alternative widenings to 1-405, 1-5, and SR-1. It also evaluated land use alternatives which would reduce the need for the corridor. The process involved a substantial number of public meetings which led to certification of EIR 267 and selection of the project alignment for the San Joaquin Hills Corridor in November 1979. Also, in 1979 the County Transportation Commission completed the county -wide, multi -modal transportation study.- This study evaluated ,alternative transportation modes and systems to determine which would best serve developing land use patterns in Orange County. 3 The multi -modal study was approved by the commission, along with its environmental assessment, in October 1979, with the following strategy direction. First, to increase capacity on existing freeways and include HOV capacity; and second,, to build the San Joaquin Hills, Foothill and Eastern Transportation Corridors. These are the two predominant strategies which are still being followed today. Between 1982 and 1985, the Board of Supervisors authorized staff to commence Phase 2, environmental documentation for construction of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The Orange County Environmental Management Agency conducted technical advisory meetings on the average of one every three weeks to review solutions to engineering and environmental problems. EIR 494 was prepared for construction -of San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The state legislature added San Joaquin Hills Transportation. Corridor to the state highway system in September 1983 in recognition of its importance to the regional circulation system. In 1986, the Federal Government authorized a pilot toll road program which, in effect, allowed Federal funds to be .used for the construction of toll roads. In 1987, the Orange County Transportation Commission designated the corridors as eligible under that program. In the same year, the California State Legislature authorized the collection of tolls on the - corridors, if a finding of the Boards of Directors of the Agencies determined that there were inadequate funding sources available to construct the roads without charging user fees. In 1988, in response to public concerns, the cities of Irvine and Newport Beach, issued a joint policy statement. This policy statement called for a substantially smaller cross-section or, in .other words, a reduced highway design. Secondly, the policy statement called for an emphasis on moving people rather than vehicles. The result of that policy statement is the Demand Management Alternative designed for the Corridor. The key component of the Demand Management Alternative is high occupancy vehicle lanes and reservation of space within the median for future rail options. A result of the establishment of that policy and the subsequent redefinition- of a Corridor cross-section was the preparation of a new environmental document. The EIR/EIS under consideration currently describes a toll facility with a smallercross-section as determined by the Demand Management Alternative. Again, an essential component of this system is the inclusion of High -Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and the preservation of space within the median for future transit options. Analysis of two south end connections to Interstate 5 are included. Plans for the Corridor include an Automatic Vehicle Identification (AVI) System, a new 4 collection system that allows vehicles to go through a toll plaza unimpeded. That system enhances our ability to implement an HOV pricing strategy; based on a resolution adopted by the SJHTCA Board of Directors. Exhibit 2 and 3 show illustrations of the transit/reversible-lanes and a double split profile which includes reversible HOV lanes. Exhibit 4 illustrates, the main line toll plaza with AVI equipment in place. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is a 15-mile route. Initial construction of -six lanes, three lanes in each direction, is planned. Future phased construction will include high -occupancy vehicle lane; and in addition to those lanes, room for future transit options is preserved. The project includes the construction of ten interchanges, one main line toll plaza, -roughly in the middle of the project, and also the construction of .six ramp toll interchanges. The total cost of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor from project inception to completion of the initial construction program is $680 million. In summary, the EIR/EIS document includes several ,alternatives: the conventional alternative, the Demand Management Alternative, and two options for the south end connection with Interstate 5, and the No Build Alternative. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (RESPONSE TO COMMENTS) The primary purpose of the environmental review process is 'todisclose the environmental consequences of a development proposal and to ascertain- what impacts can be -reduced, through implementation of an appropriate mitigation strategy. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) currently being considered has accomplished these primary -goals. The DEIR identifies that the project will have the following impacts: visual impacts to existing residences and open space areas; adverse noise impacts on the Spotted Bull Lane neighborhood; loss of coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitat; restriction of wildlife. movement; fragmentation of wildlife habitat; and reduction of wildlife populations. A significant component of the environmental review process is, public involvement through input provided at public .meetings and written correspondence- received as a result of distribution of the Notice of Preparation and the Draft Environmental Impact Report. An extensive public participation program has been carried out- during both Phase I, 1975 to 5 1982, summarized in the Project History, section of this report. The focus of the Phase 11 public participation program was the presentation of corridor, study findings to the Board of Supervisors in December 1982, and a series of public presentations in 1-983 in which the public was invited to comment on the project. Eight environmental scoping meetings were held in 1984 through 1988 to provide the public with updated information on the corridor route location study, and to receive public input regarding the project and its environmental impacts. Phase 11 notification included the placement of signs demarcating the corridor route alignment as selected with the certification of EIR 267. The signs are located at points where the alignment crosses major arterials. This physical route identification program was complimented by a home owner disclosure program- to apprise future purchasers, of the corridor alignment. Phase II public involvement also included meetings of the public agency Technical Advisory Committee, or TAC, traffic technical committee, and the Joint Policy Statement Task Force. An important component of the task force representation was participation -by, the public works director or their designee from each member agency. In July of 1988, during Phase II of the study, Draft EIR No. 494 was circulated for review. It was during the public .circulation of this environmental document that a substantial environmental consideration was incorporated into the project, specifically the Newport Beach -Irvine Policy Statement, which .resulted in a fundamental design change previously discussed, whereby the width of the corridor was significantly reduced. Based on this fundamental design change, the ,processing of DEIR 494 was ceased and the preparation of a -new environmental document was commenced, based on corridor profiles, which included a limited number of general-purpose lanes, HOV facilities, and transit right-of-way considerations. The current environmental document was circulated- for public review from September 14, 1990 to November 26, 1990. During the public review period, newspaper advertisements were published in several local newspapers on two separate- occasions, public map showings were held at University 'High School in Irvine, Laguna Beach High School, and Capistrano Valley High School, and a public hearing was held at Laguna Hills High School. By the close of the public review period, which included distribution of 4,700 notices of availability, the TCA had received 236 letters and 36 public hearing comments on the draft EIR/EIS. Responding to the comments received from Federal, state, local agencies, -public interest groups, homeowner associations, and the general public, resulted in the fine tuning of mitigation programs and additional analysis of air quality issues. 0 The highlights of the improved strategy and environmental analysis of the corridor are as follows: Air quality: Since the circulation of the draft EIR/EIS, Congress has enacted, significant amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act, including amendments to the transportation conformity provisions of the Federal Clean .Air Act. The Response to Comments document provides, an updated air quality analysis, which establishes, the San Joaquin Hills Corridor's consistency with the amendments enacted by Congress at the time the Draft EIR/EIS was being circulated for review and comment. The project is included in the 1989 Air Quality Management Plan and is part of regional efforts to -meet federal and state air quality requirements. Overall, the project provides a net benefit to the �region's air quality by removing trips from congested arterials, resulting in efficient regional travel. This free -flowing travel creates less unhealthful emissions than the near gridlock seen during peak commuting periods 'in south Orange County. Biotic resources: The project mitigation strategy has been redefined.. In response to the comments made regarding wildlife movement corridors and the need for more wildlife crossings, two additional wildlife crossings will be incorporated into the project design in addition to the one discussed in the draft EIR/EIS at the interface of Shady and Emerald Canyons. (Illustrated on Exhibit 5.) The two additional wildlife crossings will be located in Laguna Canyon and at the head of the western fork of Bommer Canyon. All three wildlife crossings, will be under bridges that will be designed to provide an open view to either side. The design will, minimize the intrusion of bridge structures into the crossing. Each bridge location will require varied design _parameters. The bottom of the crossing will be no less than 20 feet wide and no less than 17 feet in height. The roadway will have an opening in the middle to allow light to .come through. For those crossings that are at a minimum of 20 feet in width, the crossing will be shaped like an hour glass. The corridor will be fenced at the wildlife crossings and in adjacent open space areas. The fence will be seven feet in height. A section of the- corridor containing the MacArthur interchange will be redesigned within the existing right-of-way to more completely accommodate wildlife movement. MacArthur and associated ramps will cross over Bonita Creek on a bridge. In addition, Bonita Creek will remain as an open channel, similar to the existing channel. By retaining Bonita Creek as an open earthen channel capable of revegetation, and by providing a bridge structure for the corridor, wildlife movement between upper Newport Bay, 7 San Joaquin Marsh, San Diego Creek, and the San Joaquin Hills will be maintained. As a result of preparation of the Response to Comments document, there has been additional detail added to the resource management plan currently contained in the draft EIR/EIS. The additional detail ensures the long-term perpetuation of the existing diversity of natural wetland and upland habitats by providing sage scrub planting, fencing of the environmentally sensitive areas during construction; :placement of water devices for wildlife, and re-establishment of raptor roosting sites. r in : Comments were received regarding grading along the -corridor right-of-way by the TCA. All grading along the corridor alignment that has taken place to date has been approved as part of specific development projects. The TCA has not engaged -in or authorized any grading activity prior to. environmental clearance. The grading which has occurred was a function of individual development project approvals that have been addressed in environmental impact reports- certified for each project: These EIR's include environmental review of such projects as Pelican Hill Road, Allso Viejo Planned Community, .Aliso Creek Corridor Specific Plan, Country Village Planned Community, Nellie Gail Ranch, Laguna Niguel Planned Community, and Colinas de Capistrano. Biotic Surveys: The DEIR included the results of an extensive list of biotic surveys conducted over the history of the project. The corridor was surveyed in 1983, '85, '87, '88 and 1990. Over 650 hours have been spent on biological surveys :which have covered, the entire length of the corridor. Special census surveys were conducted for sensitive amphibian, reptile, bird, mammal, and plant species. Based on the analysis conducted, there is no known listed- federal endangered species within the corridor right-of-way. However, there was a sighting of one transitory least Bell's vireo within proximity of the corridor. Furthermore, a species which is not listed as endangered, but is of high interest, the California Gnatcatcher, is known to inhabit the coastal sage scrub habitat, portions of which will be removed as part of corridor construction. However, within the corridor area of benefit there is -approximately 16,000 acres of planned and dedicated permanent open space which will provide excellent habitat for preservation of the species. Known populations of two candidate plant species, the many -stemmed Dudleya. and the Orange County Turkish Rugging, do occur within the .project limits. The resource management plan provides for the collection and relocation of these sensitive plant populations to protected locations. The landscaping along the corridor in open space, non -urban areas, will be limited to a mix of native, non-invasive., drought -tolerant plant species. Coastal sage scrub will be planted on cut -and -fill slopes in the upland areas from 0 the El Toro Road interchange to approximately one mile north of the future Sand Canyon interchange. Wetland : During the process of obtaining the required permits for encroachment into wetland, areas, the TCA will finalize a wetland mitigation plan and will complete coordination activities with the natural resource agencies, such as the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Mitigation replacement and enhancement will result in no net loss of wetlands habitat. In addition, the DEIR/EIS contains an analysis of avoidance alternatives- for wetland impacts. This analysis -demonstrates that all prudent avoidance and alternative measures through past alignment alternatives have been identified and evaluated and that the current alignment is the result of design refinements to minimize impacts to wetlands habitats- and sensitive resources. Growth. Impacts and Open Space: The Response to Comments document reaffirms the conclusions and adequacy of the discussion provided in the draft EIR%EIS with respect to growth inducement, cumulative impacts, and alternatives analysis. The additional analysis contained in the Response to Comments document expands on the facts previously provided, which identify that the corridor serves existing land uses. Approximately 98.5 percent of the land within, the area of benefit consists of existing development, committed development, for protected open -space resources. (Exhibits 6,7) Dedication of the 16,000 acres of open space is a function of balancing, development. and natural resource preservation. Open space dedication occurred with full knowledge of the corridor alignment, and 'in fact, the corridor was part of the development equation. Responses stress that all three corridors are part of the cumulative analysis, and it reaffirms the planning history, which includes the consideration of alternatives. Potential Flood Impacts: Mitigation measures within the DEIR/EIS which require a "runoff management plan- have been improved to further explain the components which will be contained in the plan, such as the sampling of downstream drainages to establish a baseline standard, the .construction of detention/settlement basins to capture pollutants, the construction of ,grass -covered drainage channels to aid -in the breakdown of roadway pollutants, establishment of a regular testing methodology and schedule to monitor the- level of heavy metals and- other pollutants, establishment of maintenance procedures. With respect to the mitigation of potential flood impacts to downstream drainages, drainage facilities such as Laguna Canyon will be designed so that there will not be 'a net increase in runoff generated by the project. This will be accomplished through the retention of all storms, retention of storm flows by,a flow -through basin, early basin construction, so the basins are available during, grading of the corridor., and. use of energy dissipation devices at basin outlets to reduce water velocity. Construction Imp: Numerous comments were received from member agencies regarding the construction period impact on local circulation, disruptment of business activities near the 1-5 confluence, and impacts associated with grading activities. Existing mitigation measures have been improved to provide for local review of haul routes, local coordination of construction traffic, construction -period traffic management plans, and provision of erosion control measures during construction. The mitigation strategy for the 1-5 confluence area includes the provision of local access between Camino Capistrano and Cabot Road north of Crown Valley Parkway, if alternative two is selected, and preparation of a business access -plan to provide continued access during the construction period. Visual Resource Impacts: Finally, several comments were received regarding the visual resource impacts associated with the project. The corridor design team, working with the aesthetic design committee, has developed several design strategies to reduce the visual impact to the facility. Specifically, a split alignment profile has= been incorporated into the project design from El Toro Road to Sand Canyon Avenue to reduce grading requirements. Extensive landscaping containing a native and drought tolerant palette, staggered sound walls, and reasonable grading techniques are important components of the aesthetic considerations pursued by the committee. FINANCE PLAN AND ISSUES The draft environmental document briefly discusses the project's financing. The reason for this brevity is that financing is not an environmental issue and is typically- not the- focus of the, environmental process. The cost of constructing the corridor is going to be provided through cash on ;hand and proceeds from tax exempt revenue bonds. Payment of principal and interest on the bonds will be paid from two revenue sources, development fees and toll revenues. Development fees are paid at the time building permits are issued- for residential and non - 'residential development within established areas of benefit. *The area of benefit is divided into two zones (A and B). Based on traffic generation models, the following determines the boundaries of each zone: 10 Percentage of trips from a development proJected to utilize Corridor Zone 8% or more A 4% to 7.9% B Less than 4% Not included The second revenue component is the tolls collected .from driving on the facility. This revenue source is the more critical of the two in terms of providing sufficient revenues to cover debt services on the bonds in the initial years of operation. Combined revenue forecasts generated by Deloitte & Touche (development fees) and Wilbur Smith Associates (toll revenues) and cost data are used' to determine the project's feasibility. The major criteria utilized to assess project viability include the following: -- Cashflow in the first year of operations must cover, at a minimum, operating expenses and estimated interest expense. on borrowed funds plus a- minimum of 20% and preferred 30% cushion fora debt service coverage ratio of 120X to 130X. -- The average increase in annual debt service is limited to 2.5%. -- Debt is repaid within 30 years from the opening year at a coverage ratio .of 120X. The above criteria are known and acceptable to the financing markets. The coverage ratio is the market's required cushion to deal with the potential of -less revenue being generated than is estimated. The, feasibility analysis, Exhibit 8, identifies Phase I with HOV lanes and Phase I without HOV lanes (base case). The data that has been utilized to develop this -exhibit and the resulting feasibility analysis is currently being updated in anticipation of entering, the financial markets this summer. Questions during the public hearing process have been raised regarding the project financing. The following addresses these: Insufficient revenue to cover debt service: Development fees and toll revenues are- the sole sources of revenue available to the TCA. In the unlikely event that there .is not sufficient revenues to pay the bonds, -those entities holding the bonds are the only ones at risk. Member agencies of the TCA will not bear the responsibility for any outstanding debt. This type of financing is referred to as non -recourse financing, which means there is no recourse for payment of the principal and interest beyond the revenues generated from the project. Effect of housing slowdown on development fee revenue forecast: The current 11 housing climate is part of the cyclical nature of the development fees. The current situation impacts short term cash flows, but it has no long term effects on the financing of the project. Effect on project feasibility of cost differences between south end alignments: The cost differentials between the two south end alignments- may make the project- unfeasible. It is possible that additional funds from outside sources could be provided to eliminate or reduce the additional cost, thereby bringing the project back into feasibility. However, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to get commitments for such funds in time to secure letters of credit and complete the financing this summer. Usage of toll roads: The toll revenue estimates are provided by Wilbur Smith Associates, an international consulting firm noted for their accuracy in providing conservative toll revenue estimates. These revenue estimates will be scrutinized by the international banking community prior to issuing letters of credit and further scrutinized by market rating agencies and bond purchasers. The sophisticated traffic and economic models used by Wilbur Smith in determining travel habits as they relate to paying, for toll usage clearly indicate that the demand is there and the willingness to pay tolls exists. -It should be remembered that 50% of the demand currently exists for these facilities. Toll roads are common in .the east, south and midwest regions of this nation; Europe, Asia and several middle eastern countries. As 'a result, funding such projects through bonds secured by tolls and other project revenue is common and well understood by market . investors. Studies conducted by independent third party professionals who are qualified to project future revenues indicate that the corridor will generate more than sufficient funds.to meet debt service requirements. These independent analyses of revenue projections are a major position of the basis used by the markets in making credit determinations. This financing structure, which is not new, and which is market validated, is -consistent with a new transportation plan which stresses a user fee approach to building the entire national transportation system. This approach, or ones like it, will be used in the future by airport, port and road agencies across the country. A requirement of the 1987 state legislation which authorized placing tolls on the corridor also required that when bonds are paid off, these facilities will revert to freeways. This is a requirement in state law and cannot be changed by local elected officials. ISSUES RAISED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY LEGAL ISSUES Region 9 of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). has submitted comments to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) concerning the EIS and the project. All of the EPA's comments have been fully responded to in the Response to Comments document. TCA staff has recently met with EPA's Region 9 administrator and his staff. Good progress was made in resolving several significant issues raised by EPA, and both parties have agreed to continue to work together to resolve the remaining issues. Because the EPA letter has generated considerable attention, it is appropriate to address the major EPA comments, including where the TCA staff agrees and where we disagree with the Region 9 staff. First, there is no disagreement between EPA and the TCA staff that one of the most pressing, serious environmental problems confronting the South Coast Air Basin is air quality. It is -important to recognize the direct link between traffic congestion and .air quality. Consider - the following information, which was presented in February, 1991, 'by a former EPA official at a national conference on the Clean- Air Act: "Even taking into account the cleaner vehicles mandated by the new Federal Clean Air Act, worsening congestion on Los Angeles area freeways could increase emissions by 72 percent in 2010. This 72 percent caused -by -freeway congestion equals 55 tons of emissions per day, or 25' percent of the total emissions for the air basin allowed under Federal standards." The EIR currently under consideration concludes that the corridor will, reduce ozone- causing emissions by 12.4 percent in the area of impact when compared to the no -project alternative, and carbon monoxide emissions by 14.7 percent. (Exhibit 9) This analysis was conducted using state-of-the-art air quality monitoring techniques and using the specific procedures which are recommended by air quality agencies. The conclusions of the El are consistent with independent determinations by the -regional and state air quality agencies. The San Joaquin Corridor is identified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the Southern California Association of Governments, and the California Air Resources Board as a necessary component of the regional strategy to reduce congestion and clean the air. The corridor is specifically referenced in the 1989 air quality management plan. Further, the air quality agencies have recently proposed to include in the 1991 update of the air quality plan pricing mechanisms on tollways to encourage increased vehicle occupancy. The HOV 13� pricing policy adopted by the Board of Directors implements the air quality agencies - proposal in this regard. The TCAs' HOV policy makes it clear that .HOV lanes are an integral component of the project. The TCA Board has committed to the construction of the HOV lanes as early as feasible. Current information indicates that HOV lanes will be in place before the year 2000. Region- 9 of the EPA is concerned, however, that the corridor will cause additional growth in population, employment, and travel in a way that will eventually offset emission reductions from the corridor. The EPA statements in this regard are not supported by the documentation in the EIR, nor are .the EPA statements consistent with the findings -of the regional and state air quality agencies. The EIR documents that, to a very great extent, the, land uses in the area of benefit of the corridor are already fixed. 98.5 percent of the land area of the area benefit is ,either in existing land uses or is committed to various lands uses, including open space. The judgment of the Southern California Association of Governments, the Air Quality Management District, and the Air Resources Board is that modest increases ,in highway capacity are necessary to achieve the Clean Air Act goals. This is not the judgment of the TCA staff or its consultants, but the conclusion reached by the regional and state air quality agencies. The local and state air quality agencies have adopted a complex strategy for addressing the air quality problem, which includes significant increases in transit, the development of an elaborate HOV network in the region, transportation -demand management,'transportation systems management, growth management policies, and an increase in highway capacity. These environmental agencies have proposed a 12 percent ,increase in highway capacity between 1984 and 2010. During the same quarter -century, SCAG. estimates that population in the region will .increase by 47 percent, daily trips by 36- percent, and' vehicle miles traveled by 28 percent. In- other words, the air quality agencies have adopted a strategy to have highway capacity increases lag behind anticipated growth in the region. With this approach, it is highly unlikely that the minimal, but critical, planned improvements to the circulation system will induce growth. The growth is anticipated in the region by SCAG whether or not the regional circulation system is improved. As Exhibit 10 indicates, there are two major sources of growth in the region. One, natural internal growth from the existing population and, two, immigration from foreign countries and other regions of the United States. Neither of these sources is particularly sensitive to improvements to the highway system. While there is little evidence that highway construction causes growth, there is considerable 14 evidence that travel is increasing without .road construction. For example, Caltrans has reported that vehicle miles traveled on state highways increased by 22 percent -between 1986 and 1989. At the same time, the highway system was increased by only two -tenths of one percent. The judgment of the air quality agencies and others is that such factors as the price of gasoline, parking supply and cost, income levels, and increases in the number of workers and drivers in households are playing larger roles in the growth in travel than building new roads. EPA's major comment to the study was that Federal Highway Administration should prepare a single Environmental Impact Statement for the San Joaquin, Foothill, and Eastern Corridors. The EPA assumption or assertion is fundamentally at odds .with the rules which have. been developed by the courts governing highway environmental documents.. It is also contrary to established procedures which have been followed for every other Federal highway project in the nation. The Federal courts long ago established that highway, projects which connect to logical termini and which have independent utility are appropriately defined for National Environmental Policy Act evaluation purposes. The Federal Highway Administration a number of years ago codified these cases into a Federal regulation. The elements of the Federal regulation are shown in Exhibit 11. It is absolutely clear that the San Joaquin EIR/EIS complies with- these rules. Because of the EPA statement, however, the TCA asked for the opinion of the chief counsel of the Federal Highway Administration on this issue. The letter'from the chief counsel- states the following, in part: "After, reviewing the DEIS at headquarters, FHWA reaffirms its position that a single EIS covering all three corridors is not required. We. believe that a separate environmental document for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is appropriate and meets the requirements V NEPA. We are in the process of analyzing the detailed comments of the EPA letter and will` address them upon completion of our review. Although we have not completed the analysis, our initial belief is that the DEIS adequately assess the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project, as well as its cumulative impacts if the planned Eastern and Foothill Transportation Corridor projects are constructed." Underlying the EPA comment is a concern that the .cumulative effects of the three corridors be evaluated in each document. TCA staff maintains that the cumulative effects of the corridors were evaluated in the San Joaquin Hills EIR/EIS. For example, the traffic model included the traffic which would be generated on the Foothill and Eastern corridors. The air quality model in turn included the air emissions which would be generated from traffic on all three corridors. 15 The environmental documents utilized state-of-the-art methodology for evaluating cumulative traffic and air quality effects. Indeed, the approach which has been used to analyze regional air emissions has been recommended by SCAG for other highway .projects in the region. Further, it is precisely the approach that the EPA has advocated be used by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the analysis of highway projects in the San Francisco area. Reference is made to a letter dated September 1, 1989, from the EPA to the executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. In that letter, EPA 'stated, "All segments of the project programmed in the -transportation improvement program for a given corridor should be treated as a single entity for air quality analysis and the cumulative effects evaluated." This is precisely the approach taken in the San Joaquin EIR/EIS. EPA also suggested to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that any air quality analysis look at least- ten years into the future. The approach in the San Joaquin EIR/EIS exceeded the EPA requirements by having air quality analysis, estimate cumulative air emissions twenty years into the future. Another major comment of Region 9 of the EPA was that the Federal Highway. Administration should analyze different land use configurations, up -zoning, down -zoning, different jobs/housing. balance configurations, etc., as an alternative to the corridor. TCA staff contends that the EPA's suggestion is fundamentally inconsistent with the case law under the National Environmental Policy Act. It is important to emphasize, however, that a very diverse array of alternatives to the project have been analyzed in this EIR and in earlier environmental documents. Exhibit 12 lists the alternatives evaluated during the fifteen -year environmental process on this project. As indicated previously in this report, alternative land use configurations were evaluated in the environmental documentation at the time that the corridor was added to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Further, SCAG and the Air Quality Management District analyzed a combination of strategies, including growth management, jobs/housing balance configurations, transportation demand management, and different transportation modes and other techniques to meet the clean air requirements. Notwithstanding a strong commitment by the air quality agencies in the 1989 Air Quality Management Plan to transit, growth management, demand management, and other techniques, these environmental agencies concluded that the San Joaquin Corridor is a necessary component of the regional strategy to achieve air quality goals. 16 SOUTH END CONNECTION ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives for the south end confluence have been identified. Option One is illustrated on Exhibit 13; Option Two is illustrated on Exhibit 14. For reference, Option Two connects to the 1-5 further north. Option One connects to 1-5 south of Avery Parkway; Option Two connects north of Avery Parkway. Option Two not only provides for the connection, but also provides for local street improvements in association with the connection. The two options have been evaluated with regard to several criteria. The following summarizes TCA staffs initial assessment: Local circulation: It is generally accepted that Option Two is measurably better than Option One. Nolse: The assessment shows that they are generally equal in that most sites that are identified -and assessed from the noise perspective have the same noise measurements under either alternative, although there was one site where Option Two provided lower noise levels than Option One. Visual impact: Option Two is generally perceived to be a better than Option One. Business relocations: Option One has less relocations than Option Two. Six relocations occur with Option One, 19 with Option Two. This also has an impact on the tax base in the City of Laguna Niguel where these businesses are located. It also has potential impact, depending on the relocation program, on the employment at those businesses. Cost: Option One costs less than Option Two. The number assigned as the differential is $82 million. Opening date: Option One can be opened to traffic earlier than Option Two. The time differential is estimated to be eight months. Implementation: The ability to implement Option One is perceived to be easier to implement than two. This relates to some of the complexities of mitigation measurements -- measures that are required for alternative two and how they relate to the construction bond financing. 17 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Without the corridor, the motorist can expect approximately 45 minutes more travel time every morning and every evening traveling between Laguna, Niguel and Costa Mesa. Air pollution will increase at a faster rate without the corridor. There will be an approximate 15 percent carbon monoxide increase, 2.5 percent increase in nitrogen oxides, 12 percent increase in total organic gasses and a 0.4 percent increase in .particulate matters if you do not construct the corridor. In addition, the right-of-way will be lost without the construction of the corridor. Therefore, also lost is the right-of-way for future transit options, as well as a critical link in the Orange County high -occupancy vehicle lane network. SUMMARY The significant benefits and impacts of the corridor have been presented in this report and the environmental documentation. The following highlights some important facts: The population of Orange County has increased approximately .four percent per year for the past ten years; a population growth rate for the next 20 years is estimated to increase approximately one percent per year. (Exhibits 15 and 16) The need .for the corridor is here now. Development has occurred and will occur with or without the corridor. 98.5 percent of the area of benefit is already committed for development and land use, including open space. Without the corridor, congestion on the existing system will only dramatically increase. The corridor will reduce future carbon monoxide emissions and implement a critical component of the regional air_ quality management plan. This plan identifies the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor as a new facility needed to ease congestion and bring greater mobility to the region. This is a regional facility that has been designed and will be financed locally -- a truly unique project in California and the United States. W EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1 .Z 7 COSTA MESA IRVINE NEWPORT BEACH a 10 OR. qti 1- 5 CONNECTION - ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE # 1 i i t 1 � 5 SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR C WIV A " Rby}, Mar�scx� MISSION VIEJO ROAD HLLS' � sp�i►�AY RMD AVERY PARKWAY LAGUNA BEACH LAGUNA NIGUEL SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO 1- 5 CONNECTION- ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE #F2 20 1 4 -W 4 -4`t �S .i y� ��w'yR' •� • �!4 ' y�y ., T � „fa. i. �lj 4' • 2A1• "y+ � � i �_ Z :i a..,• ! r� ,i. ,fir { .���. i�'�4 �i,� ��� �: '� 1� ac ) I ii � i A h: A v�. � ;Yiy.4Y� �9I�I�•a 1�(f55 �� ty +? wie..yw� �t •. 'MA •a _� .lmt. 1.w is l::Z rOw EXHIBIT 6 0 C4 .081 Co C(D _ P C� Cc © rc:f: CC== a INZ cc :.xagwnH qor ',, :pi .78d0 `, NZARS, :aumN 25 _ `^r'P"vid �"'k•.� ..,w-.;n ., �.,7in.w,:,.+i......«�;_'r^n•�:....i."1'e.;w lr+�:_'.s�."r �•q e+rw, ':.Y 't:wy%-..r.... •,.+w i+ - ",,f.,.' _ .� _ _ _ _ "- -- _ Y;`;"v-:' _ 4.. - y''y'?"M-^,.+;q.K�:^�="-•.+F4;n.-hn:..�.:,dww2.w?'�+�.4.K, +Y 4 - 7 t� - - - - '•tom- - - •'J. - _ - - - -, - - t ti '';< 4 •Z 1 v- i ' � F '1 - y. V "yiAs _ sl E _ -mom 41, AWAL = q - - _ ''• - . " �, - 'art; AK kp, >z _ -sW,}}°5•' tt �^l• _ - _ a�."�- �-�r. ,.- "- •(1}/�yJ•2yr/" i rfi _ _ EXHIBIT 8 ... :aagmnX qor 1, � :pi sado 1, dwal, :8UMK 27 EXHIBIT (9) a. r.� rig d' - a� av rt, N � :r. :3 �n J Z c � c � ,, :,xagmnx qor ',, :PI aado ', R32I, :OurvN 28 EXHIBIT 10 0 o� 2 � rS O V V c== O CL g O Ga 0 oa amm o b V G o0 0 0 0 0 all . :2aq=N qor I,, :pi sado '. XiNa 1, :aUMN 29 EXHIBIT 11 QD °o CIA9 o � ce Acu .. °c= 0 0 0 ,, :.TagwnH qor ',, :pl aado ', xzgs3I3. MUMN 3® EXHIBIT 12 1� Ertl, cn -r M COE=- Cc== c0i= Z co Js C*= rg- 0 0— ACN-= C� cu CU Co. rc—= I 70 0000000000 ., :.7aqWnN qor ' , , :PI .79do 4, cxxmamx. :eUMN 31 A, :.7ac[mnN qop I. , : pi aedo I. VAINZMI, :-GUMN 32 EXHIBIT 15 J, I1J u• :.iagtwnx qor ',, :pI aado ' SHoIs. :GUMN 35 FEXHIBIT 16 36 ,, :,xeqwnN qor 4 , , :pl aado 1, 9AXN3MX:6=N ,, :,xeqwnN qor 4 , , :pl aado 1, 9AXN3MX:6=N March 11, 1991 TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR' AGENCIES TO: City Council Member JPA (SJHTCA) Member Agency Foothill/Eastern FROM: William Woollett, Jr. CorridorAgency Executive Director San Joaquin Hills Corridor Agency SUBJECT: Report on San Joaquin Hills Corridor Attached is a summary report of the staff presentation made at the public hearings on certification of the Environmental Impact Report of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor on February 14th and February 28th, 1991. Our Operations Committee Chairman Ken Friess asked that this be forwarded for your information. As you know, the Draft Environmental Impact Report recently has generated a lot of attention from the media and public at large -and is agendized for the Board meeting of March 14th for certification as to adequacy of the document and project approval. Please do not hesitate to contact myself or Steve Letterly, TCA Manager of Environmental Impact; if you have any questions or would like further information. The Agency's phone number is (714) 557-3298. ., 7I[V c D1c PEAR 141,991 � mayor, � y City of Newpart IcL; �iarh 345 Clinton Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 7141557-3298 FAX 7141557-9104