HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2015-02-23 #D AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 23, 2015
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager
FROM: Sean P. Crumby, P.E. Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: 1-405 IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT UPDATE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter for the 1-405
Improvements Project.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
Project Background
The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) has been in the process of
planning improvements to the 1-405 freeway for approximately 10 years. A Major
Investment Study was prepared that encouraged public participation from the
local agencies. In 2006, the voters of Orange County voted to extend Measure
M (1990-2010) into Measure M2. One of the projects committed to the voters
was improvements to the 1-405 freeway.
Current Project Status
Under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), public agencies are required to
prepare environmental documents for actions that may potentially affect the
environment. Currently, an environmental document and analysis has been
prepared for the 1-405 Improvements Project. The project area for the
Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS)
includes improvements on the 1-405 (San Diego) Freeway between State Route
73 (SR-73) on the south and the 1-605 Freeway on the north. The document has
gone through the public comment period (May 18, 2012 through July 17, 2012)
and a Traffic Supplement document has been prepared (to address comments
from the City of Long Beach).
In participation with the CEQA and NEPA processes, the City of Seal Beach has
submitted formal comments during both comment periods. Additionally, the City
of Seal Beach has sent numerous letters of correspondence and spoken at
numerous public meetings to convey concerns regarding the 1-405 Improvements
Project.
Agenda Item D
Additionally, the City of Seal Beach has participated in the Corridor Cities Group
(Group). The Group, comprised of the Cities of Seal Beach, Huntington Beach,
Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Westminster, and Los Alamitos, has sent a number
of correspondences to OCTA to represent the desires of the residents that live
along the proposed improvements.
The project has three alternatives, which are summarized as follows:
• Alternate 1: Add One General Purpose Lane,
• Alternate 2: Add Two General Purpose Lanes,
• Alternate 3: Add One General Purpose Lane and one High Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) Lane. Convert the two High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes to
High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes.
On October 22, 2012, the OCTA Board of Directors selected Alternative 1 as the
locally preferred alternative for the 1-405 Improvements Project. On September
23, 2013, the OCTA Board of Directors again reaffirmed Alternate 1 as the locally
preferred alternative. Caltrans has selected Alternate 3 as the preferred
alternative (PA) for the project. Caltrans has stated that the project can be
delivered in a tiered approach with Alternative 1 being delivered by OCTA, with
Caltans to follow with Alternative 3. It appears that the EIR/EIS will be certified in
the spring of 2015 with the project moving forward.
The City of Seal Beach and Corridor Cities Group remain committed to HOT
lanes being unacceptable on the 1-405 Freeway. Each City has passed
resolutions opposing high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on the 405 freeway. The
City Council of Seal Beach passed such a resolution on July 14, 2014. The
Corridor Cities have requested that a new alternative be considered. This new
alternative will add one general purpose lane and one HOV lane to the existing
freeway in each direction. There is no HOT lane included in this alternative.
Response from OCTA to the Corridor Cities' request is that the new alternative
not be considered due to lack of funding and delay on the project (due to an
amendment needed for the EIR).
On February 9, 2014, the OCTA Board of Directors was presented with a design-
build cooperative agreement for the 1-405 Improvements Project. The
cooperative agreement outlines an $82 million investment from Caltrans toward
the project. The recommended action stated, "Include $82,000,000 in State of
California funding to allow construction of the additional general purpose lanes in
a manner that would place infrastructure at the ultimate location between Euclid
Street and Interstate 605." With this additional funding from Caltrans, there is no
reason that the requested alternative from the Corridor Cities cannot be
considered for the project.
The design-build cooperative agreement was not approved on February 9, 2014.
The OCTA Board instead directed formation of an ad hoc committee to meet with
Caltrans and negotiate a modified cooperative agreement. Although the Corridor
Cities have taken positions against toll lanes, the group has requested a meeting
with the Committee to discuss tolling policies should the HOT lanes move
Page 2
forward. The cooperative agreement is anticipated to be brought back to the
OCTA Board of Directors for approval on March 9th.
A Corridor Cities meeting was held on February 11 t" and it was decided among
the Group to send a letter stating the Group's position. At the time that this
agenda report was drafted, the Corridor Cities letter was not finalized. The
framework for the letter, however, is as follows:
• The Corridor Cities are unanimously opposed to toll lanes
• The Corridor Cities are supportive of expanding the freeway to its fullest
capacity
• The Corridor Cities support the addition of two lanes, one general purpose
lane and one additional HOV lane
o This will provide greater access to the drivers along the freeway
o This will address federal degradation standards
o A new EIR does not need to be done, only an amendment
■ Timing of the project would not be delayed
■ OCTA can start construction now—footprint will be the same
A draft of the letter will be submitted to the City Council under separate cover
when the letter is completed and be available for the public during the City
Council meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Whereas there are environmental impacts related to the 1-405 Improvements
Project, there are no environmental impacts related to the letter.
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
No legal analysis is required for this item.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter for the 1-405
Improvement Project.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
*ityrM�anager
Sean P. Crumby, P.E. gram
Director of Public Work
Page 3