HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Minutes - Amended PagesJune 11, 2019
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Agenda Item No. 1
City Council Minutes
Study Session and Regular Meeting
May 28, 2019
I. ROLL CALL - 4:30 p.m.
II.
Present: Council Member Brad Avery, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Duffy Duffield,
Council Member Jeff Herdman, Council Member Kevin Muldoon, Mayor Pro Tem Will O'Neill,
Mayor Diane Dixon
SSI. Clarification of Items on the Consent Calendar
In response to Council questions regarding Item 4 (Initiation of Planning and Zoning Code and
LCP Amendments Related to Design Standards for Single -Family and Duplex in Multi -Family
Residential Zoning Districts), Community Development Director Jurjis explained the initiation
process, confirmed more work needs to be done and public meetings will be held, and described
how building sizes could change.
Regarding contracts, in general, Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill received confirmation from City
Attorney Harp and City Clerk Brown that they would work on the best practice to place contract
letter proposals online and bring back a policy.
SS2. Review of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
Budget
The following CIP project conflicts were announced:
Council Member Avery: Balboa Peninsula Crosswalks Improvements Phase II and Balboa
Boulevard Pedestrian Crossings Phase II projects due to real property interests
• Council Member Duffield: Mariners Mile Parking Study due to business interest conflicts
• Council Member Muldoon: Assessment Districts 111, 113, 116, 116B and 117, Southern
California Edison (SCE) 20A Credit Purchase, Advanced Meter Infrastructure, and Grant
Howald Park Rehabilitation projects due to business interest conflicts; the West Coast
Highway Median Landscaping Phase III project since he previously recused himself on
April 28, 2018 from Phase I due to business interest conflicts; and Streetlight Rehabilitation
Program (Eastbluff) and Slurry Seal projects due to real property interests
• Council Member Brenner: West Coast Highway Median Landscaping Phase III, Marguerite
Avenue Pavement, and Grant Howald Park projects due to real property interests
• Council Member Herdman: Bayside Drive Roadway Rehabilitation, Marine Avenue
Reconstruction, Balboa Island Enhancements, Beach and Bay Sand Management, Grand
Canal Dredging, Balboa Island and 10th Street Swim Platforms, Fire Station No. 4, and
Balboa Island Draining Master Plan/Pump Stations projects due to real property interests
Public Works Director Webb, Acting City Engineer Sinacori, and Administrative Manager
Copeland utilized a PowerPoint presentation to explain the purpose of the CIP; provide a recap
of the 2018-2019 CIP projects; list the completed projects, projects in progresshn construction,
and major projects in design; discuss the proposed 2019-2020 CIP budget; review City Council
priorities; highlight projects by CIP budget sections (Council Member Muldoon left the dais
during Assessment District discussions); review the budget summary, new funding sources,
and proposed budget revisions (Council Member Muldoon left the dais during SCE 20A
credit purchase discussions and Council Member Brenner left the dais during West
Coast Highway Landscaping discussions); report that, if the revisions were approved, the
CIP's new total wouldbe $93.8 million; and discuss the positive impacts the CIP has on the City.
Volume 64 - Page 107
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
May 28, 2019
Jordan Otterbein, President of the Newport Beach Restaurant Association Business Improvement
District, confirmed the BID collected 93% of its assessments and noted the benefits of the BID.
Mayor Dixon expressed her support for BIDS and believed the 1994 Law validates the value BIDS
offer to its members and allows the BID to grow.
Motion by Mavor Pro Tem O'Neill, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to continue the
item to the June 25, 2019 City Council meeting.
The motion carried unanimously.
XVI. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
Dennis Bress expressed his concerns about the lack of correspondence from the City to the Orange
County Board of Supervisors regarding reports on the growth of John Wayne Airport (JWA) and
discussed the idea of providing shuttles from the Boring Company to transport travelers from North
Orange County to Ontario Airport instead of JWA. City Attorney Harp clarified that the City is only
able to comment on the current JWA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) at this time.
Sandra Ayres expressed the importance of the Planning Commission appointments and requested
Council select individuals that will follow rules and regulations, and remain neutral and fair.
Marsha Kendall believed JWA expansion is one of the most pressing issues for the City and
recommended the City hire outside counsel that specializes in airport issues.
Denys Oberman displayed a slide to discuss the ongoing situation she is having with her neighbor taking
a piece of her property and how the City has been responding to her concerns.
Susan P., .tea, Dvorak expressed concerns regarding JWA, thanked the Council Members that attended
the Orange County Board of Supervisors meeting on May 7, 2019, and provided suggestions for finding
a resolution that will best protect the residents of the City.
Pat 118NNRss Banas spoke about the history of the 1985 JWA agreement and expressed concerns about
airport traffic, noise and soot coming from airplanes.
An unidentified speaker discussed the issues she is having with a construction project next to her home,
the damage it is causing to her property, and asked what measures are in place to avoid issuing permits
to contractors who do not have licenses.
Max Johnson expressed concerns regarding the homeless population gathering at the base of the Balboa
Pier and the impact this may have on the Junior Lifeguard program that will be starting spoon. Mayor
Dixon assured Mr. Johnson that the City has a plan in place to keep everyone safe.
XVII. PUBLIC HEARING
15. 939 Via Lido Soud Residential Dock Reconfiguration - Appeal of Harbor Commission's
Decision [100-2019]
In response to City Attorney Harp's announcement regarding ex parte communications, Council
Member Duffield indicated he met with the appellants; Council Members Muldoon, Brenner and
Herdman and Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill reported they received emails from the appellants and their
attorney but did not speak with them; and Mayor Dixon confirmed she received an email from and
met with the appellants' attorney.
Utilizing a PowerPoint presentation, Administrative Manager Miller discussed the details of the
appeal, including the proposed dock project, the difference between a pierhead line and a project
line, and the impact this project would have on the public waterway in the Harbor.
Volume 64 - Page 114
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
May 28, 2019
Discussion ensued between Council and staff regarding City Council Policy H-1, Newport Beach
Municipal Code Chapter 17.50, requesting the Harbor Commission conduct an analysis on how
many neighboring docks extend past the pierhead line, the expense of dredging versus extending
the dock, providing the Harbor Commission with specific guidelines to assist with these types of
projects in the future, safety and navigation issues with extending the dock and large boats that
may be docked, the inconsistency of enforcement in the past, and how the City would enforce the
policy going forward.
Sherman Stacey, on behalf of the appellants, Mark and Shana Conzelman, utilized a PowerPoint
presentation to explain why they believed it was necessary to appeal the Harbor Commission's
decision. He discussed City Council Policy H-1, believed the new dock configuration meets the
policy's qualifications, and assured Council that the dock would not have a negative impact on
navigation, adjacent properties, or any other use in the Harbor.
In response to Council questions, Mr. Stacey indicated the appellants have no intention to dock any
large boats and explained the reasons for the dock reconfiguration request.
The City Council commented on their reasons for supporting or not supporting the Harbor
Commission's decision and what should happen in the future to avoid more appeals of this nature.
Mayor Dixon opened the public hearing. 4W V
Sherman Stacey requested that Council reverse the Harbor Commission's decision and approve the
appellant's application. He confirmed the dock project line is at the acceptable maximum location
and believed it would not interfere with dredging projects.
Jim Mosher requested revisions be made to City Council Policy H-1, believed the public has the right
to access the Harbor and private projects should not limit that, and expressed concerns about the
size and length of this dock, the p+!Rep4pi4ac-aLecedent it would set if permitted, the possibility of a
large boat docking there and the interference it could have on Harbor dredging projects.
Administrative Manager Miller reported that, during dredging, only vessels are asked to move, but
permanent floats and docks would impact dredging projects. He also commented on the GIS error
regarding the incorrect project line on the map.
Shana Conzelman indicated they purchased the property with the understanding that the dock
project would be permitted, expressed concerns regarding inconsistent information she has received
over the years from the City on other subjects, and took issue with the lack of notification regarding
the changes to City Council Policy H-1.
In response to Mayor Dixon's question, Administrative Manager Miller indicated the City did not
send individual notices regarding changes to City Council Policy H-1, but the topic was discussed at
several Harbor Commission meetings.
Mark Conzelman asked how the City can prohibit him from docking a large boat when it was
permitted when they purchased their property, even though they do not intend to dock a large boat
as it impedes their view. He confirmed they are reconfiguring the dock to make it more efficient and
requested Council overturn the decision and not send this back to the Harbor Commission for
additional review.
Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Dixon closed the public hearing.
Council Member Avery concurred that the Conzelman's can currently dock a large boat at their dock,
using the current configuration, but believed the proposed configuration would make the distance
past the project line unacceptable.
Volume 64 - Page 115