Irvine Co. throws weight behind Measure T

Alex Coolman

NEWPORT BEACH -- The Irvine Co. has thrown its support behind Measure

T and opposes Measure S, according to a letter sent Wednesday to

proponents of the Traffic Phasing initiative.

“We are taking a position on this issue as a planner and as a company

that has a long history and a long future in the community, and that

cares a great deal about the quality of Newport Beach,” said Gary Hunt,

executive vice president of the Irvine Co.

Hunt added that the company had conducted studies and weighed the pros

and cons of both measures before deciding to take sides on the issue.

The letter, signed by Hunt, characterizes the Traffic Phasing

initiative, or Measure T, as a responsible effort to address “the

legitimate traffic concerns of Newport Beach residents.”

The measure would add parts of the city’s traffic phasing ordinance to

the city charter and nullify Measure S -- also known as the Greenlight

initiative -- should voters approve both measures.

Hunt described the rival Greenlight initiative as a proposal that

would end up “discouraging the city’s revitalization, harming property

values and ironically leading to increased traffic congestion.”

Measure S would require a vote on developments that add more than 100

peak-hour car trips or housing units, or whose floor space is 40,000

square feet over the size allowed in the city’s general plan.

Measure T supporter Clarence Turner, co-chairman of Citizens for

Traffic Solutions, the group to which the letter was addressed, said

Thursday that he was encouraged by the Irvine Co.’s stance.

“I think it’s a recognition that Measure T is a reflection of a

program that has worked, and it has worked substantially over the years,”

Turner said.

Phil Arst, a spokesman for Measure S, viewed the endorsement in

dramatically different terms.

“The Irvine Co. has shown its true colors,” Arst said in a statement.

“It wants to join the other developers in order to pave over Newport

Beach with a dozen major high-rise buildings.”

Arst said the motive behind the endorsement appeared transparent:

“hundreds of millions of dollars for [the Irvine Co.] and more than

50,000 auto trips a day for the residents.”

Turner said it would be a mistake to assume that the developer’s

endorsement was simply a matter of self-interest.

“The Irvine Co. has been involved in this community for years and

years,” he said. “They would certainly like to see the city progress as

it has over the years.”

Hunt pointed out that there is not much open space in the city. He

said the issue is not one of new development, but one of revitalizing

older areas of the city through proper planning.

Arst fired back that the exact nature of that progress is a factor

driving Measure S.

“The people of Newport Beach have to take a stand against the Irvine

Co. and others and say ‘that’s enough!’ ” he said.