Website © 2014 Ronald Douglas Kennedy. All Rights Reserved.                                             Site designed by Undisclosed

Exhibit 13

Pelican Hill Road

Irvine Coast Land Use Plan Amendment

Home SECTION I SECTION II, Items B,C,D SECTION III, Items N,O,P SECTION IV--Map & Text Notes

QUICK LINKS

SECTIONS

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H
I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P
Q  R  S  T  U  V  W
X  Y  Z

Notes on Maps
and Text Exhibits

click here

Requires FREE
Adobe Reader

 

MAPS

[Map 1]

Pelican Hill Road/Newport Coast Drive OVERVIEW

[Maps 2A & 2B]

Proposed Pelican Hill Road Alignment

[Map 3]

Road shown going from Pacific Coast Highway to MacArthur Boulevard

[Map 4]

The Irvine Company grand opening of Newport Coast Drive

[Map 5]

Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA)/Coastal Commission approval of realignment of Ford Rd.

[Letter 5B-1 & 5B-2]

[Letter 5C-1–5C-3]

A.G. asking for the CCC approval of TCA putting a Toll on Newport Coast Drive

[Map 6]

Thomas map showing how the 73 toll road has consumed Newport Coast Drive, tolls fraudulently collected daily

[Map 7]

The EIR graphically shows that a toll booth will be placed at the intersection with Newport Coast Drive (using the old name Pelican Hills Rd.)

 

TEXT

[FNCD 1]

December 19, 1980 City Of Newport Beach Transportation Plan Citizens Advisory Committee

[FNCD 2]

May 19, 1987 Draft Environmental Report For Pelican Hill Road Irvine Coast

[FNCD 3]

Cover letter from A.G.’s Office regarding my request for a TCA Exhibit

[FNCD 4]

San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency Ramp Transaction Summary, received from the TCA July 27, 2012

[FNCD 5]

Cover letter from A.G.’s Office. This is TCA exhibit 7

[FNCD 6]

January 7, 1994 Gilbert W. Ferguson Assemblyman Seventh District, Newport Beach. regarding his Opinion request.

[FNCD 7]

March 17, 2012 letter to the honorable Dr. Charles Lester, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission

[FNCD 8]

December 9, 1993. Gilbert W. Ferguson, Assemblyman Seventh District, Newport Beach—his first request for an A.G. Opinion

[FNCD 9]

5/13/93 approved, California Coastal Commission: “Revised Proposed Findings”

[FNCD 10]

December 20,1993 from Newport Beach Council Member for Corona Del Mar, writes to the Honorable Dan Lungren, Attorney General

[FNCD 11]

California Coastal Commission letter April 27, 2012

[FNCD 12]

6/26/92—TCA/LSA Associates, Inc.: Irvine Coast CDP (Coastal Development Permit) findings

[FNCD 13]

A.G. Conflicts-of-interest

[FNCD 14]

Capitol Weekly: “The California Coastal Commission—Unrepentant Sinners”

[FNCD 15]

State of California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General: Legal Opinions & Quo Warranto

[FNCD 16]

March 3, 2009 letter from the A.G.’s Office

[FNCD 17]

 

[FNCD 18]

Letter to Department of Justice, December 4, 2012—still looking for the missing A.G. Maiser report

[FNCD 19]

Orange County Resolution, NO. 82-598 Transportation Corridors Development Policy

[FNCD 20]

Newport Coast Local Coastal Program, Second Amendment, December 3, 1996

[FNCD 21]

Annexation and Development Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company, 11-08-2001

[FNCD 22]

California Coastal Commission, August 18, 1995—Mr. Charles Damm, District Director, from the San Diego office

[FNCD 23]

October 15, 1985. Resolution of The Board Of Supervisors of Orange County, California, Resolution No. 85-1477, Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program

[FNCD 24]

April 20, 1988. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors, Orange County, No. 88-537

[FNCD 25]

April 20, 1988. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors Orange County, Resolution No. 88-538

SECTION II, page 5

 

contract. Of our public LCP traffic mitigation rights. But not being enforced by Government Agencies'. In protecting this Public contract right, for the Public benefit.

There seems two options for returning Newport Coast Drive to a free by-pass road: One, take the toll off at the toll corridor. Or TCA rebuild as close as possible back to MacArthur Boulevard, At their dollar expense as originally built, as originally given by the Irvine Company, for their County and LCP. Coastal Development Permit's, June 9, 1988.
[ NCD 32 ]

J. >>> N. B. CITY COUNCILMAN, & HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, SHOW'S TCA. TRICKERY<<<

Newport Beach City Councilman Phil Sansone writes in the Daily Pilot February 26, 1993. [ NCD 22 ] "The councilman said in this newspaper clipping that he was told not to "muddy the water" with complaints, as toll way officials are negotiating with bond representatives, and changing the project could jeopardize the financing. He added that a toll way official told him that the planned 50 - cent toll for the northern section of Newport Coast Drive is essential for the project to meet its financial plan and obtain bond financing."

As said by TCA finance executive Wally Kreutzen, " it (moving the planned toll on Newport Coast Drive north of New Ford Road) would have a fiscal impact, there's no doubt about it. How much of an impact, I don't know."

"Kreutzen said that once those bonds are sold, he believes the four year - project, which consists of a 15-mile, six-lane road extending from San Juan Capistrano to Corona Del Mar Freeway, will be able to overcome all obstacles." " If we sell this deal, this agency will prevail,and the road is going to get built." Kreutzen said."

Yes the TCA sold this Deal. but did this deal have: A Legal Rights and Due Process at Law. In taking the public LCP By-Pass right's. The right of freely using Newport Coast Drive, away from the driving public. No it did not. " If we sell this deal, this agency will prevail" Yes so far through fraudulent activities. By the A. G. Office, CCC. O C. and TCA. And most likely unknown individuals at this time.

Letter [ FNCD 10 ] December 20. 1993 Newport Beach Councilman, Phil Sanson. page 1. " My constituents are deeply offended by bureaucratic attitude of the TCA since January 1993 when the toll issue became general public knowledge." page 2, " was TCA. refusal to brief the ICLC and the Newport Beach City Council in February and selling the bonds in March part of their strategy to quell the public out cry because they knew it would take legal action, which the opponents could not afford."

Also, Harbor View Hills Home owners Association Ms. Yvonne Houssels.

May 4, 1994  600 letters to A. G. opinion. "These letters all emphasized that the public was not informed."

January 7, 1995 The results of the TCA's own traffic survey showed that 87% of the motorists would divert to other streets if a toll is imposed"

K. >>> TCA. SEC. BOND PROSPECTUS FRAUDULENTLY, FAILS TO SHOW NEWPORT COAST DR.<<<

TCA. sold, $ 1,078,629,411.05 Senior "Federal" Toll Road Revenue Bonds on March 4, 1993. [ NCD 28 ] Even in this TCA bond "Official Statement" shows continuing fraud's, Now as a Federal SEC fraud, -------"this agency will prevail ?"

A part of their bond prospectuses has a letter with map,s as shown on the next page by one of their agents. "Wilbur Smith Associates , Engineers,Economist, Planners" page 24. refers regarding "Current Traffic Patterns" But their statement call-outs fail to list Newport Coast Drive. The LCP. Traffic By-Pass Road which has been open at this time for Two Years and Four Months. The report refers to Pacific Coast Highway calling it out as a open road. TCA. fraudulently list's six maps: "Traffic Flow Map, Highway Improvements, Traffic Screen line, Economic Influence Areas, Survey Station Location map and Location Map, San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor" All map's visually do not show Newport Coast Drive as a completed open road. And falling far short of reaching MacArthur Boulevard. This is just another one of the on going TCA fraudulent statement's made regarding, their supposed right to toll Newport Coast Drive. But this time its to the Federal Government, they provide false information to.

I reported this potential fraud, In my Opinion Letter January 8, 1994 to the California Attorney General office [ NCD 20 ] never received a answer from the A. G. office on this potential SEC Fraud. They passed on this also. And performed their own fraud's in helping the TCA take this California Coastal Commission, Local Coastal Plan Road Finding's, call out for a Free Bypass Mitigation Road rights. The: A. G., CCC. and TCA have taken this away from use the driving public, through their fraudulent actions, separately. Or as a group conspiracy, of these agencies?

L. >>> CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, SAN DIEGO OFFICE'S. FRAUDULENT RESEARCHED LETTER IS USED IN THE A. G. OPINION. DENYING LCP. ROAD MITIGATION <<<

The California Attorney Generals, Opinion No. 93-1205, May 12, 1994. brings these frauds together [ NCD A ] In there Opinion ruling at, foot note seven [7] on page 6. Stating in part.

" The commission's staff has determined that placing a toll booth at Newport Coast Drive will not violate any requirements imposed [ did the A. G. only read letters by Lawyers?] under the California Coastal Act of 1976. We have been presented with no evidence or legal arguments requiring a contrary conclusion".

Later in trying to understand the documented history of this foot note denial of the LCP. By-Pass Road mitigation and the Irvine Coast Development Agreement, "Exhibit C Irvine Coast Local Coastal Plan Findings of Approval and Supporting Documentation" from June 9, 1988
[ NCD 1 ] I received a response from Rodney O. Lilyquist Senior Assistant Attorney General San Diego Office, on what fact's exhibit 7. was based on. Rod, mailed me a copy of a letter dated February 3, 1994. to the Public Works Director,City of Newport Beach . With a note to me on top stating, " Ron I believe this is the letter we relied upon for footnote 7". [ NCD 11 ] this letter is from MR. Charles Damm, District Director, California Coastal Commission. San Diego Office. [ he also headed up the Long Beach office] With this key fraudulent fix statement, lacking factual historical back ground, by Mr. Damm, Or it's A. G. ghost-writer's?

" As I mentioned in our October letter, the portion of Newport Coast Drive where a toll is proposed is not in the coastal zone. As such, we cannot assert jurisdiction based on the toll issue without a direct tie to the adopted provisions of either the Irvine Coast LCP and/or the coastal development permit. Our research shows no such tie." This is a: gross, sham, fraudulent statement. As spelled out below.

But this CCC Memorandum December 4, 1987. To: Commissioners and Interested Persons. From: Chuck Damm, District Director South Coast District. [ NCD 12 ] Gives his true historical background.

page 2. "Irvine Coast Local Coastal Program and the findings of approval adopted by the Commission on November 19, 1987"

page 3. "The 1987 LCP circulation improvements provide significant recreational access benefits for inland residents by providing a new access route from inland residential areas to Crystal Cove State Park."-----" The 1987 LCP circulation improvements provide significant relief to the most congested links of the adjacent arterial system (primarily Pacific Coast Highway and MacArthur Blvd)"

page 4. " In addition to relieving traffic on Pacific Coast Highway during peak commute hours, the construction of Pelican Hill Road in particular will provide significant recreational access capacity by connecting inland areas directly to Crystal Cove State Park ( see Exhibit 13 in the Executive Summary)."

this "exhibit 13." is at [ NCD 4 ] page 22. A Federal Court will decide which statement's are true as further backed up by historical documentation below. at [ NCD 23 ]

 

...continued, page 6

SECTIONS

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H
I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P
Q  R  S  T  U  V  W
X  Y  Z