HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/08/1989 - Regular MeetingCOUNCIL MEMBERS
G \fkoon
�}f �p G ey0
0sent x x
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
C
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
PLACE: Council Chambers
\ TIME: 7:30 P.M.
DATE: May 8, 1989
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
Tex Griffith, President of the Newport —Mesa
Board of Realtors, presented the California
Association of REALTORS GUIDELINES booklet
concerning State and Local Housing.
I A. ROLL CALL.
B. Reading of Minutes of Meeting of
April 24, 1989 was waived, approved as
written, and ordered filed.
C. Reading in full of all ordinances and
resolutions under consideration was
waived, and City Clerk was directed to
read by titles only.
D. HEARINGS:
1. Mayor Strauss opened the public hearing
pursuant to the Municipal Improvement
Act of 1913 concerning UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES IN CORONA HIGHLANDS (proposed
Assessment District No. 57).
Report from Public Works Department
Protest letters from owners of 55
parcels of property.
Support letters from owners of 12
parcels of property.
The City Manager commented that the work
pertaining to the subject assessment
district has been ongoing for two years,
and subsequently a petition was
submitted to the City Council
representing in excess of 61% of the
property owners requesting the creation
of the district to underground the
utilities in Corona Highlands. He added
that as the City receives comments from
affected parcel owners, staff has
analyzed the valid responses and there
is sufficient concern as to the manner
in which the assessments are spread;
therefore, it is recommended that the
City Council open the public hearing
tonight, and continue it to June 26 to
permit an additional analysis of the
assessments, after new assessment
notices are mailed.
The Public Works Director responded that
the total number of protests received
are 55 out of 185 parcel owners in the
district, representing 27% of the
district and does not constitute
majority protest. He added that the
percentage of protests will be
Volume 43 — Page 166
Underground
Utilities/
Corona
(89)
57
I�
L
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
tfa C S JS\4pp i �
� May 8, 1989
reassessed at the June 26 continued
public hearing with a final report to
the City Council; and referred to the
wall maps displaying the original
petitions, the locations of the
protests, and another map showing the
basis of the units of benefits as is
proposed under the current formula. He
further stated that the assessment
engineer could not be at tonight's
meeting; however, the legal counsel is
present to answer any questions by those
people who will not be able to be .
present at the June 26 continued public
hearing.
Roy Giordano, 626 Seaward Road,
addressed the.Council concerning the
revised method of assessment; the new
resolution of intention; the revised
engineer's report; and in his opinion,
the most critical is the new bid on the
bonds. He stated that in fairness to
all of the parcel owners of Corona
Highlands the entire matter be reviewed;
there be a subsequent hearing with the
association members who wish to attend;
and an opportunity for anyone who wishes
to file a new protest based on the
current circumstances.
The Public Works Director, in response
to Mr. Giordano, stated there will be a
public meeting similar to the one that
was held on April 25, so that everyone
is not only fully informed, but they
will have an opportunity to voice their
opinion and to ask questions in an
Informal setting. With respect to
setting aside the previous protests, he
deferred his response to Legal Counsel,
Mackenzie Brown.
Mackenzie Brown, Law Firm of Brown and
Diven, 18 Corporate Plaza, addressed the
Council, and stated that rather than
start over with a new hearing, they have
discussed continuing the public hearing
with the bond purchaser, Miller and
Schroeder, in order to keep the bid
proposal at 7.10%. which is a very
favorable proposal. He added that to
start over would extend the process
another 45 - 60 days, but if the public
hearing is continued, the bond purchaser
has agreed to stay with this proposal,
and possibly only a slight adjustment if
the bond buyer index goes up. He stated
that they will be submitting•a revised
boundary map, which will be filed with
the County Recorder; file a modified
Volume 43 - Page 167
Dist#57
I�
U
:®
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
;,USERS MINUTES
tP f9� C0 4,Jt
r G� � �
N May 8, 1989 INDEX
engineer's report which is necessary in Assessment .
many cases where there are modifica- Dist#57
tions, and based upon that, notify the
property owners with a 20 -day mailing
period, prior to the proposed
continuation date of June 26. He stated
that another reason for the continuation
is to conclude the proceedings before
the cost goes up by reason of a possible
change or increase from the Edison
Company contract for services, which has
a time limit.
Jim Kennedy, representing Southern
California Edison Company, addressed
Council Member Sansone's inquiry
regarding what period of time their
current bid is valid for, stating that
their letter mailed on February 12,
1989, indicated a 90 -day period;
however, in view of the modifications
they will go to June 26 at the same
price without a change. He added that
if it goes somewhat beyond the June 26
date, they would have to give a new bid.
In answer to Council Member Turner's
inquiry regarding how the protests that
have already been made will be
registered, Mr. Brown commented that the
protests that have been validated (27 %) will
stand as of record, and if the property
owners, after receiving the new notices
wish to withdraw their protests, the
statute still provides for that
opportunity, so that at the June 26
meeting the final computations will be
reported on the written protests
received. He added that the new notices
will go out, and if nothing changes with
the protests, they still would be
starting with the 27 %, and after
receiving testimony on June 26, the
formal and final report will be made on
the protests received.
James D. Schindler, 409 Cabrillo
Terrace, addressed the Council with
the following concerns: - The
assumption that the majority of property
owners have approved this project based
on a petition that was circulated two
years ago is not valid because it did
not include any cost figures,. or
details; - The requirement for those in
opposition to submit written objections
in order to be counted in the decision
making process without a corresponding
requirement on the part of those in
favor, prejudices the outcome in favor
Volume 43 - Page 168
C
Motion
El
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
EMBERS MINUTES
\n
tV May 8, ] 989 INDEX
of the proponents, and there is always a Assessment
certain percentage that will not commit, Dist#57
therefore, abstention is not tantamount
to automatic approval; - Because of the
area factor being used in computing the
preference, owners of large parcels
carry more weight in the decision making
process, and is in contradiction to the
democratic principle of one man, one
vote; - Retired persons living on fixed
incomes may, without their consent, be
compelled to go along with the project
in spite of the imposition of a very
large financial burden; - Property
owners along the upper terraces who have
the highest property values because of
the views, and who will obviously
benefit the most in the removal of the
poles, are not paying their fair share
of the project cost in relation to the
benefits received. Some property owners,
notably those whose views are out back
over the Canyon, and who have no poles
are still being required to pay full
assessments; - Because the hookup cost,
which is borne by the homeowner, was not
included or mentioned in the notice
from the City, they are being asked
to commit to a project without knowing
its full cost, and such additional costs
could be substantial; - In conclusion,
Mr. Schindler urged the Council to
reject the "flawed" plan because of the
inequities, prejudices in its concept,
and because it imposes a genuine
hardship on many retired residents on
fixed incomes.
X Motion was made to continue public
hearing to June 26, 1989; and direct
staff to bring back engineer's revised
report and Resolution of Intention on
May 22, 1989.
Council Member Watt looked to staff to
provide information to her questions
dealing with Council's discretion
toward: (1) the minimum standard to
protect people when assessed and the
fact that the petitions received two
years ago are being taken as a basis for
"yes" votes before the costs to the
property owners would be known; and (2)
the owners of large parcels who get a
larger vote and bigger benefit being
assessed the same as .smaller parcel
owners.
Volume 43 - Page 169
LL
All Ayes
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
9
9'PAOt �
May 8, 1989
The Public Works Director, in answer to
some of Council Member Watt's inquiries,
stated the following: With respect to
the original petitions, and the 60% in
favor, it does not require the Council
to make a final determination to form
the district, nor does it bind anyone to
a district being formed, but it does
have to do with the procedure to be
followed. The Council has within its
jurisdiction to either form or not form
the district regardless of the
percentage of favorable signatures that
petition the district. The Council,
however, must abandon the district if
more than a majority protest is
received. If less than a majority
protest is received, (less than 50 %) the
Council may elect, based upon the
testimony received and on its assessment
of the facts, to proceed with the
formation of the district. The questions
raised about the formula will be
answered on June 26.
The motion was voted on and carried.
Council Member Sansone stated that he
has some concerns about the following:
There are some people who cannot afford
the assessments, and between now and the
June 26 meeting it is very important for
the City to address this problem.
Another problem is the hookup cost that
is separate from the undergrounding
cost. The hookup goes from the central
undergrounding point to the house, and
in some cases this would affect and go
underneath driveways, sidewalks, through
or around garages, etc., and can be very
complicated and costly.
2. Mayor Strauss opened the public hearing
and City Council review of MODIFICATION
NO. 3527, a request of HERBERT STRICKER,
3109 Clay Street, approved by the
Modifications Committee on April 4,
1989, to permit the construction of 6
ft. high stucco walls, wrought iron
fencing and gates varying in height from
6 ft. to 7 ft. 6 inches t, which will
encroach 5 ft.f into the required 20 ft.
front yard setback at the above address,
with the condition that the development
shall be in substantial conformance with
the approved plot plan.
Report from the Planning Department.
Volume 43 - Page 170
Assessment
Dist#57
Modificatn
No. 3527/
Stricker
(94)
L
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
A
May 8, 1989
Motion x
Ayes x x x x x x
Noes x
E
MINUTES
The City Manager referred to the map
attached to the staff report, and stated
that on April 4, the Modifications
Committee approved an encroachment of 5
feet into the front yard setback of ZO
feet, and a fence 6 foot high with a
wrought iron addition on top of leg ft.
Council Member Hart asked for Council
review on the proposed project, because
consistently in Newport Heights there
has been a policy of not allowing any
fences within 8 ft. from the curb back
into the yards, and only 3 ft. in
height.
Herbert Stricker, 3109 Clay Street,
applicant, addressed the Council,
stating that he wanted to replace a
termite — riddled wooden fence that was 6
ft, high with a stucco and wrought iron
fence of the same height. He added that
the fence would not only enhance his
property but the neighborhood, while
providing his property with security.
He further stated that he has 6 ft.
block walls on both sides, approved by a
previous modification.
Hearing no one else wishing to address
the Council, the public hearing was
closed.
Discussion ensued, wherein motion was
made to approve a 3 ft. high fence,
anywhere from 8 ft. back from the curb.
3. Mayor Strauss opened the public hearing
and City Council review of USE PERMIT
NO. 3347, a request of BARRY AND
MARJORIE LOUD, Corona del Mar,
(unanimously approved by the Planning
Commission on April 13, 1989) to permit
the construction of a second dwelling
(Granny Unit) on property located at 307
Narcissus Avenue; zoned R -1. The
proposal also includes a modification to
the Zoning Code so as to allow the
construction of three bay windows on the
second floor which encroach 18a inches
into a required 4 ft. side yard setback.
Report from the Planning Department.
Volume 43 - Page 171
U/P 3347
Loud
(88)
E
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
C
o� 9N May 8, 1989
The City Manager, in summary, recalled
the history of legislation that
permitted Granny Units under certain
circumstances on an R -1 lot, which would
make two units on the same lot, with
certain requirements, i.e., the age of
the inhabitant(s) and that they must be
related to the occupant of the main
dwelling. He added that the City
recently adopted an ordinance regulating
the conditions of Granny Units, and the
Planning Commission found that the
subject request met all of the
conditions of the ordinance with the
exception that the Zoning Code does not
permit the applicant's request for
second floor bay windows extending out
approximately 18 inches from the face of
the structure.
The City Attorney informed the Council
that the Planning Commission requested
his office look into the possibility of
revising the Granny Unit ordinance to
require that the occupant in the second
unit be related by "blood" marriage to
the owner of the property and occupant
of the principal unit; and also examine
the feasibility of increasing the
minimum lot size for Granny Units to
5,500 ft. While they have not completed
their review of the foregoing, the City
Attorney, stated that their preliminary
study indicates the City does have the
power to increase the minimum lot size
to 5,500 ft. per lot, and this would,
for purposes of old Corona del Mar,
eliminate the possibility of
constructing a Granny Unit on parcels
which consist of I' lots, adding that
these modifications will be coming to
the Planning Commission on May 18.
In answer to Council Member Turner's
inquiry, the City Attorney stated that
there is no specific requirement under
State law, but a policy decision on the
part of the Council that the person
owning the property occupy the principal
unit. He added that this particular
property was in the name of the parent
and a quitclaim deed has been prepared
transferring title to the son and the
mother as joint tenants.
Barry Loud, 307 Narcissus, applicant,
addressed the Council, stating that the
main opposition at the Planning
Commission hearing regarding the subject
use permit has been addressed in his
Volume 43 — Page 172
U/P 3347
r,l
n
Motion
•
x
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
C qr
6 9Gq� �� 9a
�pf May 8, 1989
compliance with all of the requirements
of staff and the Planning Commission
regarding parking, traffic, and density.
Ron Hagerthy, 303 Narcissus, addressed
the Council stating that he represents
several other property owners in.the
area, who also attended the Planning
Commission hearing. He commented that
they are not objecting to the subject
use permit, but vigorously oppose the
City's ordinance as it relates to old
Corona del Mar. He referred to his
hand -out illustrating statistics that
the City has already provided housing
for those people 60 years and older. In
addition, he commented on the history
of disregard for the Zoning Ordinances,
which results in an open invitation to
continue the abuse of illegal rental
units. In summary, he stated that the
foregoing remarks of the City Attorney
be considered seriously regarding
increasing the minimum lot size to 5,500
sq. ft., in old Corona del Mar, except
for those lots that are dual lots; and
that there should be some consideration
given to the verification of occupancy.
Joseph Sanchez, 306 Narcissus, addressed
the Council, stating he presented his
letter to Council Member Sansone
regarding illegal add -on rental units,
and that today's issue on the Granny
Unit is but one manifestation of the
problem that exists in old Corona del
Mar; particularly Narcissus, Orchid
Avenue, bounded by Pacific Coast Highway
and Seaview. He stated that presently
25 -30% of the property in this area is
occupied by illegal rental units and the
area is rapidly becoming an R -2 zone.
He strongly recommends that the City
increase the minimum lot size from 5,000
to 5,500 or 6,000 sq. ft., and requested
more aggressive action against the
blatant use of illegal rental units.
The public hearing was closed after it
was determined that no one else wished
to address the Council.
After clarification from the City
Attorney, motion was made to approve Use
Permit No. 3347, subject to the Findings
and Conditions contained in Exhibit "B"
of the staff report with the following
modification to -
Volume 43 - Page 173
U/P 3347
LL
r]
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
O
L ,\Co-to �f 9.►
no May 8, 1989
x
Condition No. 3:
"Prior to final inspection of the
building improvements, that the
applicant.shall record a covenant,
the form and content of which is
acceptable to the City Attorney,
binding the applicant and
successors in interest in
perpetuity so as to limit the
occupancy of the second dwelling
unit to one or two adults 60 years
of age or over, and committing the
permittee and successors to comply
with current ordinances regarding
Granny Units. Said covenant shall
also contain all conditions of
approval imposed by the Planning
Commission or the City Council."
Discussion ensued, wherein Council
Member Turner, upon agreement from the
maker of the motion, asked that the
following modification be made to -
Condition No. 5:
"That the applicant shall provide
evidence of legal ownership of the
property prior to the issuance of
building permits, and that the
primary residence shall be
continuously occupied by the legal
owner of the property."
The motion, as amended, was voted on and
carried.
E. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
F. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following actions were taken as
indicated, except for those items removed.
1. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - pass to
second reading on May 22, 1989:
(a) Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 89 -10,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH AMENDING SECTION
11.08.030 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
USE OF THE BEACH AT NIGHT.
Volume 43 - Page 174
U/P 3447
Ord 89 -10
PB &R
Recreation
(62)
r:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
n
�
G�
to May 8, 1989
(Recycled report from Parks,
Beaches & Recreation Director,
dated February 23, 1989)
(b) Proposed.ORDINANCE NO. 89 -11,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH AMENDING THE NEWPORT
BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION
14.12.090 PERTAINING TO THE
BASIC WATER QUANTITY CHARGES.
(Report from Utilities
Director)
(c) Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 89 -12,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY '
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH AMENDING SECTION
14.24.065 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
SEWER USE CHARGE. (Report
from Utilities Director)
(d) Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 89 -13,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH AMENDING SECTION
5.12.080 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING
TO GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION OF
TAXI CAB CERTIFICATES OR
PERMITS. (Report from
Business License Supervisor)
2. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION:
Ord 89 -11
Utilities
Wtr /Swr
(89)
Ord 89 -12
Utilities
Swr Use
Chrg
(89)
Ord 89 -13
Taxi Cab
Permits
(86)
(a) Resolution No. 89 -30 supporting the legislation
passage of Senate Bill 1221 which SB 1221
would increase the REFUND VALUE OF Res 89 -30
CERTAIN BEVERAGE CONTAINERS. (48)
(Letter from the Californian's
Against Waste and copy of SB 1221)
(b) Resolution No. 89 -31 expressing
support for the proposed STAGE II
EXTENSION OF THE COSTA MESA FREEWAY
(ROUTE 55) FROM 19TH STREET TO
INDUSTRIAL WAY. (Letter from Mayor
Buffs requesting support)
Volume 43 - Page 175
CMesa Frwy
Extnsn
PhII /Rt 55
Res 89 -31
(74)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MEMBERS
'OA S 0 �9
\$�,p May 8, 1989
MINUTES
3. CONTRACTS /AGREEMENTS:
(a) Removed from the Consent Calendar.
(b) Removed from the Consent Calendar.
(c) Approve and authorize the Mayor and
0/C Fire
City Clerk to execute an Agreement
Dpt /CNB
that will continue the FIRE AND
Rescue Srvs
RESCUE SERVICES FROM ORANGE COUNTY
C -2208.
FIRE DEPARTMENT. (Report from Fire
(38)
Chief)
(d) Approve amendment to LITTER CONTROL
0/C Juvnl
PROGRAM (Contract No. 2286) for
Crt Wrk
continued use of Juvenile Court
Prgrm /Ltr
Work Program; and authorize the
Cntrl
Mayor and City Clerk to execute
C -2286
subject amendment. (Report from
(38)
General Services Director)
4. COMMUNICATIONS - For referral as
indicated:
(a) To Utilities Department for
Utilities
inclusion in the records, memo from
(89)
Utilities Director concerning
letter expressing thanks for
.'
presentation of certificate of
appreciation on behalf of the
efforts of Fred W. Gilbert, retired
General Manager of COASTAL
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT.
(b) To Public Works Department for
PW
inclusion in the records, letter
(74)
from Dr. Jan D. Vandersloot
expressing thanks to the City for
abandoning AVON STREET PARKING LOT
PROJECT.
(c) To Aviation Committee, letter from
Aviation
agent for Eastbluff Homeowners
Cmte
Community Association concerning
(24)
steps to prevent "GENERAL AVIATION
AIRCRAFT" from flying over Newport
Beach's populated areas.
(d) To Fire Department for inclusion in
Fire
the records, letter of appreciation
(41)
from Louanna and Guy Entrekin for
the PARAMEDICS prompt and
professional action during an
emergency on April 20.
(e) To Police Department for reply, 10
PD
®
letters from Balboa Peninsula
(70)
residents requesting more drastic
measures to curb CRUISING.
Volume 43 - Page 176
E
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
w9 y9�oo� a
May 8, 1989
(f) To Parks, Beaches and Recreation PB &R
Department for reply, letter from (62)
Andrew L. Thompson with
accompanying copies of 8 letters
from residents of Jasmine Creek
Community, expressing opposition to
the proposed installation of TENNIS
COURT LIGHTS.
(g) Removed from the Consent Calendar.
(h) To Planning Department for Planning
inclusion in the records, letter (68)
from Jeffrey P. Massnick in
opposition to HOAG SIGNAGE PERMIT
NO. 1421(A).
Note: After agenda printed,
received letter from Balboa Coves
Community Association in
opposition.
(i) To Aviation Committee for inclusion lAviation
in the records, Balboa Peninsula Cmte
Point Association letter nominating (24)
Mary (Mimi) Singleton to a
permanent board seat on the CITY'
AVIATION COMMITTEE.
5. COMMUNICATIONS - For referral to the
City Clerk for inclusion in the records:
None.
6. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - For denial and
confirmation of the City Clerk's
referral to the claims adjuster:
(a) Hertz Corporation for Karen Thurman
alleging damage to vehicle as a
result of collision with City
Police Department vehicle on Balboa
Boulevard on December 31, 1988.
(b) Jacqueline Kay Herrara, aminor,
through her Guardian Ad Litem
Robert L. Herrara, for personal
injuries sustained as a passenger
in a vehicle being driven
northbound in Eastbluff, that
collided with a light pole north
the intersection with Backbay on
November 5, 1988.
(36)
Hertz Corp
Thurman
Herrera
(c) Frank Kerns, Joyce Elliott and Manuel Kerns/
Castello for recovery of personal Elliott/
property allegedly left in vehicle, Castello
which was towed from scene of
accident on March 19, 1989.
Volume 43 - Page 177
U
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
EMBERS MINUTES
` G� � 9A
A
�W May 8, 1989 INDEX
(d) John Luckett alleging he was given
Luckett
citation in error near Davey's
Locker /Main Street in December,
1988; seeking reimbursement for
loss of time and earnings, damages
for stress, etc.
(e) Mohammad Ali Sohanaki seeking
Mohammad
reimbursement for damages to
Ali
vehicle as a result of alleged
Sohanaki
towing error at 2702 Amalfi on
March 14, 1989.
For rejection:
(f) Late Claim of American Fire and
American
Casualty as subrogee of Martin
Fire /Cas/
Glynn Welsch for property damage as
Welsch
a result of City vehicle striking
rear of a car pushing that car into
their insured on June 27, 1988.
7. SUMMONS AND COMPLAINTS - For denial and
confirmation of the City Clerk's
referral to the claims adjuster:
None.
8. REQUEST TO APPROVE /FILL PERSONNEL
VACANCIES: (Report from the City
Manager)
None.
9. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS -
For Council information and approval:
(a) Removed from the Consent Calendar.
For Council information and filing:
(b) Report to the City Manager
Planning
regarding ACTIONS TAKEN BY PLANNING
Cmsn
COMMISSION ON APRIL 20, 1989.
(68)
10. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULING - May 22,
1989:
(a) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88 -2(C) - A
GPA 88 -2(C)
request initiated by the City of
Housing
Newport Beach to revise the HOUSING
Element
ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH
(45)
GENERAL PLAN as required by State
law. (Report from Planning
Department)
Volume 43 - Page 178
E
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
C y
\GIN May 8, 1989
(b) Report from General Services GS /1989
Director concerning APPROVAL OF THE Cnty Sld
FINAL DRAFT OF THE 1989 COUNTY Wst Mgm Pln
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN, and (44)
scheduling public hearing.
11. FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 11937(Revised) -
Approve the Final Map of Tract No.
11937, a request of REGIS CONSTRUCTION,
INC., Newport Beach, subdividing 22.99
acres of land into one lot for a 138
unit residential condominium
development, one lot for existing
commercial use, and a residual parcel
not for development; on property located
at 1200 East Coast Highway, on the
northeasterly corner of East Coast
Highway and Jamboree Road; zoned P -C.
(Report from the Planning Department)
12. TRACT NO. 11935 - Approve the
improvement plans and specifications and
accept the public improvements
constructed in conjunction with Tract
No. 11935 (2700 Pacific View Drive);
authorize the City Clerk to release the
Faithful Performance Bond (No. 6045462)
and Labor and Material Bond (No.
6045462) in six months provided no
claims have been filed. (Report from
Public Works Department)
13. ENCROACHMENT APPLICATION OF WORTH PROBST
- If desired, approve application to
construct new retaining walls, winding
stairway, and planters encroaching 27
feet into the public right -of -way
adjacent to 3317 Ocean Boulevard, Corona
del Mar, subject to: (a) No
construction permitted under this
approval that would not be permitted by
the Zoning Code in front of setbacks;
(b) execution of a nonstandard
improvement agreement; (c) an
encroachment permit from the Public
Works Department; (d) a building permit
from the Building Department; and (e) a
survey by a licensed surveyor. (Report
from Public Works Department)
14. SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATIONS - Uphold
staff's recommendation to approve the
following, subject to conditions listed
in the staff report:'
(a) Application No. 89 -055 -
Temporary street closure for
the 8TH ANNUAL SCENIC 5K RUN,
old Corona del Mar on June 10,
1989, from 7:00 - 10:00 a.m.
Volume 43 - Page 179
Tract 11937
(Revised)
Tract 11935
Permit/
Encrchm
(65)
Permit/
Spcl Evnt
(65)
Apli#89-
055
l
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
\0%\O
rq-V0 C May 8, 1989
(b) Application No. 89 -118 - Ap111189 -118
Temporary street closure,
Cliff Drive Park, for MEMORIAL
DAY PICNIC, May 29, 1989, from
3:00 - 4:00 p.m.
(c) Application No. 89 -119 - Use Apli1189 -119
of public beach by MAUI & SONS
SURF CONTEST, at 54th Street,
June 3 and 4, from 7:00 -
5:00 p.m.
(d) Application No. 89 -127 - Use Apli1189 -127
of public beach by NEWPORT
OUTRIGGER CANOE CLUB for canoe
race on beach at 18th Street,
on May 13, 1989, from 7:00
a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
15. HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS - Uphold Harbor
staff's recommendation for approval, Perm Apli
subject to conditions listed in the (51)
staff report for.the following:
(a) Application No. 124-3400 - Ap1i11124-
Lido Marina Village to revise 3400
their commercial docks bayward
of 3420 Via Opporto. (Report
from Marine Department)
(b) Application No. 259 -1 -
Removed from the Consent
Calendar.
16. BUDGET AMENDMENT - For approval:
BA -066 - $143,830 (Refer to agenda item
F -3(b))
G. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Report from Aviation Committee
recommending approval of ENCROACHMENT
PERMIT TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF AN
AIRPORT MARKER BEACON IN AN UNUSED
SECTION OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE, as proposed
by Public Works Department, was
presented with recycled report dated
April 24, 1989 from Public Works
Department.
The Council was advised that letters
were received from Donald R. Segner, and
Robert B. Olds, and petitions from
residents in the vicinity of Eastbluff,
regarding the subject airport marker
beacon,
Volume 43 - Page 180
(25)
Permit/
Encrchm
Marker
Beacon
(65)
i
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
�yoo�
� 4s1 May 8, 1989
The Executive Assistant, Ken Delino,
addressed the Council, and used exhibits
to illustrate the flight track which
most commercial aircraft should take in
departing John Wayne Airport. He
commented for years the Council and
staff have heard complaints from
residents on both sides of the Bay that
the commercial aircraft were straying
from the flight track, and in an effort
to solve the problem, the City asked the
Orange County Board of Supervisors to
look into some type of navigational
device for assistance. He continued to
illustrate that when the aircraft takes
off, the pilot plugs in two radio
frequencies on the dashboard in order to
implement the turn, dialing in one radio
frequency which gives him a distance
from a certain marker (DME) that reads
off the miles, and plugs into another
instrument (VOR) that reads on needle,
giving the pilot a compass direction
from a certain point. He further
explained that when the pilot sees the 1
mile DME position, and /or when it reads
118 on the other instrument, he makes
the turn. He added that in working with
the FAA, and County, the City Aviation
Committee and the City's Consultant, Don
Segner have proposed a simple marker
beacon to assist the pilot in making the
turn at the designated point with an
audio signal and blinking light as a
reminder. In conclusion, he stated the
manufacturer of the equipment testifies
that even though the marker beacon is in
the proposed location which is short of
the actual point, this signal can be
manipulated within tolerances to allow
the turn to take place where it is
supposed to so that the pilot doesn't
turn too early.
In answer to Council inquiry, Mr. Delino
stated that marker beacons are used all
over the nation in a variety of
circumstances and situations, and that
no additional hardware or additional
pilot training is needed, just simple
instructions from the airline to the
pilot.
Dan Stringer, President of the Balboa
Island Improvement Association,
addressed the Council regarding the
validity of the foregoing information,
stating that the homeowners on Balboa
Island, the Peninsula, Irvine Terrace,
Sea Island; Promontory Point, Beacon
Bay, (the lower end of the flight path)
Volume 43 - Page 181
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 8, 1989
feel that the beacon may, or may not Encrch .
narrow the zone of the planes taking off Marker
to where it targets more of one Beacon
particular segment of the population.
He requested the Council propose to the
Aviation Committee that if the marker
beacon does go in, the study that Vince
Mestre did be updated to determine
if there is going to be a "zeroing"
effect on more than one segment of the
population.
Bob Olds, 641 Vista Bonita, Eastbluff,
Member of the Aviation Committee,
addressed the Council regarding his
letter to Council Member Turner with
concerns that the marker beacon location
was far short of the optimal, or
desirable position, but stated he has
been in contact with the marker beacon
manufacturer and is aware that they can
move the signal to a more appropriate
position for warning. He explained that
the residents in Eastbluff are sensitive
to early turns, and each second means
that the aircraft moves about 100 ft. to
the east, or over Eastbluff. By means of
a visual exhibit, he went on to
illustrate that with the flight track
already very close to Eastbluff, the
aircraft that turn six seconds early, if
it is induced to turn rather than go to
the required turning point, means about
two football fields in length the
aircraft will move to the left, which is
more than the distance between a normal
track and the homes in Eastbluff, and
that this was their reason for objecting
to the initially planned installation.
In addition, he explained that there are
late and early turns now, and a properly
placed beacon may improve and help
reduce the potential for late turns; and
therefore, asked Council's support to
have the location and equipment
perimeters such that the pilots are
alerted approximately 3 to 3;1 seconds so
that they will not turn too early thus
affecting Eastbluff, and turn at the
prescribed point to the benefit of
Westcliff and Dover Shores. He also
recommends that the City monitor the
marker beacon so that if it doesn't work
right it can be modified, fixed, or if
necessary, withdrawn.
Volume 43 — Page 182
i
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
EMBERS MINUTES
i
` 9G D.�,r, 9�
�,p dip May 8, 1989 INDEd
Art Barlow, 2000 Vista Caudal, President
Encrchm/
of the Eastbluff Homeowners Association,
Marker
addressed the Council, stating that they
Beacon
have 647 homes including those homes
along the bluff area which is the very
narrow point on the east side. He added
that they are overflown many many times
and get the greatest impact from noise
in that area. Therefore, he stated that
they support the beacon; however, they
would like to see it go a little further
down the Bay, and would like to have
access to the City Council if there are
problems with the marker beacon.
Roy Englebrecht, 405 Vista Grande,
addressed the Council, expressing that
although it has taken five years for
progress, he is thankful the residents
will finally have a viable option. He
stated it is important that the marker
beacon be installed at 5,936 ft., which
has been the location all these years
during the study. He supports the
beacon, and expressed his appreciation
to the City staff, and Aviation
Committee for their work, but cautioned
that he is afraid in just the time it
takes to adjust or readjust, there still
will be jet planes over the elementary
and high schools.
Mary Singleton, 315 Sapphire, Balboa
Island, Chairperson of Citizens for Air
Route Equity, addressed the Council
stating that in the last two years the
people in the lower Bay area feel that
the flight path has gone further and
further to the east, so that now the
areas of Sea Island, Irvine Terrace, and
Corona del Mar are very seriously being
affected. She commented that when Mr.
Segner, attended an Aviation Committee
meeting, he said that the pilot's
reaction time is 1'k to 2 seconds, and
the proposed six seconds before they
even get to the proper point to turn is
way too early. She stated that they are
against the marker beacon, and feel the
beacon itself, will adversely impact
their area, elevate the problem of
aircraft flying too far east as a result
of the prevailing winds, and be
affected by the proposed County's
standard takeoff procedure if the early
reaction timing is implemented. She
suggested if the Council does approve
the proposed installation, that possibly
another beacon be installed lower down
the way to keep aircraft over the water,
Volume 43 — Page.183
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MEMBERS
�► A9 y9'A C� 9�
\�t�,D Grip May 8, 1989
or noise monitors on either end of
Balboa Island, installed and maintained
by the City.
MINUTES
Wayne Chase, 213 Sapphire, and 30 -year
pilot, (Orange County Airport, and
national airlines) addressed the Council
referencing the map, and stated that
the proposed marker beacon will not
solve the problem of the prevailing
winds.
Jack Billings, 665 Via Lido Soud,
President of the Lido Isle Community
Association, addressed the Council in
support of the marker beacon. He added
that if there are other needs for
controlled aircraft down the lower Bay,
this is something that should be looked
into.
Pete Drummond, resident of Dover Shores
and member of Aviation Committee,
addressed the Council giving the
following history: Some years ago he was
appointed to work with the County and
the FAA to try and control aircraft to
go down the Bay on a positive flight
track, but no such system ever emerged.
The beacon was arrived at by way of a
suggestion from a pilot, but they
struggled to find a suitable site, and
when they did, it took a long time for
the County to get approval from the FAA.
The FAA finally approved it on the basis
that it was not a required navigation
device, and simply to control the
aircraft as desired by the City, but
they would not pay for it. The County
agreed to pay for it, and that is the
reason that County funds were
established. The site they selected
then was a little different than the
current proposed site because he and the
City's consultant took the word of the
County that it was the right location,
and until one week ago they were not
aware of this discrepancy. Since then,
he has discussed with the manufacturer
what could be done to the pattern, and
as .a result found that the angle of the
cone can be shaped to whatever width is
needed at a given altitude, with some
limits to this, and these are being
explored. There is another system being
discussed, and that is to modify the
antennas being used.so that it would
give a signal reducing the distance and
the 6 or 8 second time range. It should
be remembered that this is an alerting
Volume 43 - Page 184
Encrchm/
Marker
Beacon
U
it
Motion
x
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
O ¢
0f 9NMay 8, 1989
device, and the instructions from the
FAA and the operating instructions that
each airline furnishes to its pilot
personnel does not include procedures
for the marker beacon.
Mr. Drummond, in summary stated there is
every opportunity that the current
location will work, and is an
installation that is good. He,
personally feels that the route down the
Bay and over the water most of the
time is a safer one, but unfortunately
it does go over Balboa Island, and that
the sound levels there are less than
they are further up the Bay. As far as
the Balboa strip is concerned, you have
to cross it somewhere to get to the sea.
Another thing that is good is that
before the flights increase under Phase
II, we should get this installation in
and operating, get experience with it,
and be sure it meets the requirements.
Council Member Turner commented that
there has been extensive testimony at
tonight's meeting regarding the marker
beacon, and an item which has been very
thoroughly discussed during the past
five years at the Aviation Committee
meetings. He stated that among the
numerous issues is that of noise
abatement, and that the installation of
the marker beacon is not a "panacea"
insofar as changing the noise patterns
on Balboa Island. He added that in
supporting the marker beacon, he would
hope this action not be interpreted to
mean one section of the City's interest
is being protected over another. He
briefly commented on agenda item F -4(g),
regarding the delayed thrust program
designed for Balboa Island, and the
FAA's response is that they will not
support it because it is unsafe, but the
City is still investigating this
determination.
In summary, Council Member Turner stated
that he believes the Council should
support the marker beacon; and
therefore, made a motion to concur in
the Aviation Committee recommendation .
to approve ENCROACHMENT PERMIT to ALLOW
THE INSTALLATION OF AN AIRPORT MARKER
BEACON in an unused section of
University Drive, subject to the five
following conditions:
Volume 43 - Page 185
Beacon
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 8, 1989
1) The marker beacon shall be
installed and operated in a
manner which will enhance the
ability of airline pilots to
strictly conform to the then
current approved departure
procedure(s).
2) The County shall monitor the
performance of the marker
beacon, based on increases or
decreases in the percentage of
aircraft deviating from the
then current departure
procedure(s), and for the
first year after installation,
report its findings to the
City Council on a quarterly
basis with subsequent reports
on an annual basis.
3) The County shall, as
necessary, modify the
trajectory or other
operational characteristic of
the marker beacon to ensure
conformance with the then
current departure
procedure(s).
4) The City reserves the right to
request that the County close
the system down, provided that
after a thorough technical
evaluation of the system it is
determined that the goals of
the marker beacon are not
being met.
5) Six months after the marker
beacon has been installed and
operating per specification,
the Aviation Committee of the
City of Newport Beach shall
reevaluate the noise studies
conducted by Mestre Greve
Associates (January, 1989) by
requesting that firm review
the effects of the marker
beacon as it pertains to noise
abatement from the beacon
location to the sea, with a
specific emphasis on Balboa
Island and the Balboa
Peninsula, to determine if the
beacon has caused a greater
concentration of noise in any
given area.
Volume 43 - Page 186
Marker
Beacon
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
�9 S9lkO* 9N May 8, 1989
x
Discussion ensued regarding the intent
of the foregoing motion, whereupon it
was voted on and carried.
2. Report from Public Works Department Balboa Cvs/
recommending approval of agreement with Sod W1 Cnst/
Balboa Coves Community Association for BC C/A Agm
BALBOA COVES SOUND WALL CONSTRUCTION, C -2591
was presented. 1(38)
Discussion ensued, wherein motion was
made to approve agreement with Balboa
Coves Community Association for BALBOA
COVES SOUND WALL CONSTRUCTION; and
authorize Mayor and City Clerk execute,
but bring back policy concerning
mitigation of sound'walls to future
study session for further discussion.
3. Report from Tidelands Affairs Harbor
Committee recommending approval for Permit
Wallace Hunt, Harbor Permit Application Apli#259 -1
259 -1, to revise the residential pier (51)
and float bayward of #1 Collins Island,
was presented.
X Discussion ensued. wherein motion was
made to bring back the application to
the City Council on June 12; in the
interim Council Members Hart and Watt to
work with other City departments
involved, i.e., Fire, Harbor Department,
and the applicant regarding the welfare
and safety of the adjacent property
owners.
Tom Simandl, 100 S. Bay Front, addressed
the Council stating that there is only
one solution to the problem, and that is
to prohibit inside tie of any vessel at
the One Collins Island dock, and if the
proposed application is approved it will
result in an unworkable compromise for
the following reasons;
*This is a navigable water way that
has existed in this area for over
20 years, and it can only be
preserved by not having a side tie;
°The Orange County Harbor Patrol
has commented that the proposed
side tie restricts fire boat access
to the docks at 100 and 106 S. Bay
Front;
Volume 43 - Page 187
❑I
Ayes
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
VCIL MEMBERS
iP� \Cotp 0 4q
\y G1 j►
0� May 8, 1989
°In the event of a vessel
emergency, i.e., sunken boat,
sinking vessel, vessel leaking
fuel, vessel.with no power, the
vessel could not be towed from
those docks because of the limited
access caused by the side tie that
is currently existing at One
Collins Island;
'Because of a tidal tunnel effect,
combined with prevailing westerly
winds, a serious safety hazard
exists.
MINUTES
In summary, Mr. Simandl stated that the
application as it exists, does not
address the following questions: "What
happens if it is approved and the owner
does not construct, i.e., does that 32
ft. sail boat get to stay there until
the owner decides to do something with
it? What about an obstruction during
any other delay in construction; and
also, what happens if the dock at 106 S.
Bay Front side ties a boat - -the way the
permit is currently worded it says that
there has to be an 18 ft. six passage
way between any boat side tied at One
Collins and 106 S. Bay Front."
The motion, as stated in the foregoing,
was voted on and carried.
Harbor
Permit
Apli#259 -1
4. Copy of letter to Ken Delino from JOHN Aviation
WAYNE - ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT Manager Cmte /John
George A. Rebella regarding the FAA's Wayne Arprr
response to the County's request to (24)
consider a delay in the reapplication of
thrust at the coastline, was presented.
Dan Stringer, 700 S. Bay Front,
representative of Balboa Island
Improvement Association, addressed the
Council, stating that they are very
appreciative of the Aviation Committee
and the City Council's effort on their
association's behalf regarding the
delayed thrust program, but also
disappointed that the FAA is against the
procedure.
Council Member Watt stated that the two
things that would help Balboa Island
would be the delayed thrust and some
change in the standard that would allow
less noisy aircraft.
Volume 43 - Page 188
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\,1, '° C �G � 4y 'yam May 8, 1989
Motion
All Ayes
r�
Motion
All Ayes
x
x
MINUTES
Following discussion, motion was made to
approve the agenda action to refer to
Aviation Committee, copy of letter to
Ken Delino from JOHN WAYNE - ORANGE COUNTY
AIRPORT Manager George A. Rebella
concerning the FAA's response to
consider a delay in the reapplication of
thrust at the coastline.
5. Report from Public Works Department Wtr Mn Impr
w /protest letter from J. T. Malloy, Back Bay/
regarding awarding CONTRACT NO. 2733 for Bayside
WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN BACK BAY AND C -2733
BAYSIDE DRIVES, was presented. 1 (38)
John T. Malloy addressed the Council
stating that he objects to awarding the
bid to Irvine Pipeline Company, Inc.,
for the subject project, inasmuch as
there is an irregularity in their bid.
The Public Works Director commented that
Mr. Malloy is an excellent contractor
and very professional; however, the
intent of the bid from Irvine Pipeline
is very clear and not ambiguous, and
they were able to bid a lower price for
the subject project.
The City Attorney stated that he
concurs in the remarks made by the
Public Works Director, and that the
Council has no ability today to award
the contract to Mr. Malloy. He further
stated that the Council's options are to
either award to Irvine Pipeline, or
reject all bids.
Motion was made-to waive the
irregularity in the bid documents of
Irvine Pipeline Company, Inc.; approve
Budget Amendment No. 066 for $143,830
(decrease in Unappropriated Surplus and
increase and transfer in Budget
Appropriations; Water Fund); award
Contract No. 2733 to Irvine Pipeline
Company, Inc., for a total price of
$273,,631; and authorize the Mayor and
1 City Clerk to execute subject contract
for WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN BACK BAY
AND BAYSIDE DRIVES.
H. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION:
1. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 89 -8, being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING
SECTIONS 7.04.020, 7.04.025,
Volume 43 - Page 189
Ord 89 -8
Animal Regs
(70)
ROLL
u
Motion
All Ayes
0
x
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 8, 1989
7.04.030, 7.04.040, 7.04.055,
7.04.090, 7.06.010, 7.10.010,
7.20.020, and 7.20.050 OF THE
NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO REGULATION OF
ANIMALS IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH,
was presented for second reading with
recycled report from Parks, Beaches &
Recreation dated April 24, 1989.
The City Manager summarized that both
the Environmental Quality Citizens
Advisory Committee, as well as the
Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Commission, have reviewed the foregoing
ordinance, which modifies the present
regulations.
Mayor Pro Tem Plummer commented that the
new section dealing with "Maintaining
Sanitary Conditions," is a good
regulation, but inquired about
enforcement and penalties.
The City Manager stated that if this
section of the Municipal Code is
violated, it is enforced by the Animal
Regulation Officer who issues a ticket
for an infraction punishable by an
amount set by the Municipal Court
Judges.
Mayor Pro Tem Plummer made a motion to
adopt Ordinance 89 -8, and requested that
sometime next year the City should
consider increasing the animal license
fees to reduce its subsidy costs.
2. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 89 -9, being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADDING
CHAPTER 11.17 PERTAINING TO THE
OPERATION, LAUNCHING, AND HAULING
OF VESSELS AND JET SKIS ADJACENT TO
THE PACIFIC OCEAN, .
was presented for second reading with
recycled report from Marine Director,
dated April 24, 1989.
Letter dated April 25, 1989 from William
S. Gray concerning jet skis.
Letter from Bill Sharp, Editor of
SURFING Magazine suggesting stronger
restrictions than currently proposed on
use of jet skis.
Volume 43 - Page 190
Ord 89 -9
Marine
Recreatnl
Actvts
(51)
L
L
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
00\O
040 � May 8, 1989
The Council was advised that after the
agenda was printed, communication was
received from the Jet Ski Boating
Association.
The City Manager referred to additional
information presented for their
consideration tonight since the proposed
ordinance was introduced on April 24,
regarding the interpretation of Section
11.17.020 and the Dory Fleet, and
suggested that the proposed ordinance be
reintroduced on May 22.
John Snelgrove, 408 San Bernardino
Avenue, addressed the Council stating
that he is in favor of an ordinance
prohibiting all jet ski use within the
surf line and launching from the beach,
and referred to the signed petitions
presented to Council to that fact. He
added that he does not feel jet skis and
its operator with an approximate force
of 400 pounds that can travel 35 miles
per hour should be in the surf competing
with swimmers or surfers.
Roger Hagie, 14152 Klee, Irvine, and
employee of Irvine Kawasaki Motors,
manufacturer and distributor of the
Kawasaki Jet Ski, addressed the Council,
stating that as a company they don't
oppose jet ski regulations that prohibit
them from areas where there are swimmers
and surfers, and are agreeable to a
reasonable approach governing
watercraft. He suggested that
consideration be given to at least
maintaining one ocean front access
corridor to launch jet skis with a clear
definition as to what are the areas they
can operate the personal watercraft, and
that Kawasaki Motors would attempt to
communicate the necessary information to
prospective owners of jet skis to
properly comply with the regulations
adopted.
Tom Brimer, 6908 W. Coast Highway,
addressed the Council, stating that he
and his family are year -round users of
the beach and has had a near - collision
with an irresponsible jet ski rider. He
added that in his opinion, the proposed
ordinance does not effectively restrain
jet skis, and leaves the City open for
possible liability.
Catherine Martin, 1824 W. Ocean Front,
and a representative of International
Jet Ski Boating Association, addressed
Volume 43 - Page 191
Marine
Recreatnl
Actvts
L
ROLL
rILi
E
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
n
\CP20 j, L
May 8, 1989
the Council stating that she concurs in
Mr. Hagie's comments and fully supports
the Marine Department's intention to
keep vessels out of congested swimming
areas, but feel that some provision
should be made for people who wish to
use their boats during the hours
prescribed by the ordinance. She added
that there are approximately over 900
jet ski owners in the Costa Mesa,
Newport Beach and Corona del Mar areas.
She opposes total restriction of all
vessel launching and feels that the City
of Newport Beach should take into
account the needs of its residents who
are boat owners, as well as the visitors
who come to the beach. She suggests
that the area immediately to the west of
the Newport Pier be considered as a
launching corridor for vessels, as the
Dory Fleet has already set the precedent
for launching there.
Mike Marshall, 2474 Santa Ana Avenue,
addressed the Council, suggesting that
any enforcement regulations should be
practicable in its approach; however,
the request for a corridor further
confuses the issue, as this City is the
only beach City that allows mechanized
launching for vessels from the ocean
front. He further commented that he
sees nothing wrong with launching
vehicles such as jet skis in the harbor
and designated areas, but a safe and
prudent distance away from swimmers and
surfers should be considered. He added
that jet skis are vessels, and that the
City should reconsider the ordinance to
strengthen the regulations.
Bill Stone, 2199 Maple Street, Costa
Mesa, addressed the Council, stating
that he is a personal watercraft owner
who rides frequently off the beaches in
Newport, and agrees with the segregation
of personal watercraft from surfers and
swimmers. However, he believes that the
use of a Newport Harbor access area
would be dangerous for all personal
watercraft users, for the fact that the
watercraft is smaller, in some cases
difficult to operate among larger boats,
and not a worthwhile solution. He is in
favor of an access corridor, or separate
part of a beach area to launch and get
out pass the surf to ride, but feels
that the time from 10:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. is restrictive, and the access area
should be open throughout the day.
Volume 43 — Page 192
Recreatnl
Actvts
L
E
on
Ayes
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
EMBERS MINUTES
O
6 gG9'A
�,p �� May 8, 1989 INDEX
Tom Pratte, representing the Surfrider
Marine
Foundation in Huntington Beach,
Recreatnl
addressed the Council, commented that
Actvts
the purpose of the ordinance sets a
restriction prohibiting jet skis from
10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., May to
September, and all other times would be
open. He added that personal watercraft
other than jet skis are compatible, but
cited the noise, obnoxious fumes, smell
and hazards imposed by the jet skis. He
suggested that the ordinance apply to
swimmers, surfers, body surfers,
paddlers, kyakers, i. e., all
nonmotorized uses. He also suggested a
200 yard distance from any surfer,
swimmer, bather, nonmotorized person
recreating in the water, and feels that
these suggestions are short of an
outright ban on jet ski watercraft.
Nancy Skinner, 1724 Highland Drive,
addressed the Council, stating that she
is a swimmer, and that when the jet skis
go by with the fumes and noise they
leave behind endangers the safety of the
swimmers, as well as the environment.
She added that she would like to see a
total ban on the use of jet skis in the
ocean.
X
Discussion ensued, wherein it was
determined that from the testimony
given, the proposed ordinance, as it is
presented, needs to be revised;
therefore, motion was made to
reintroduce the subject ordinance on
May 22 for the first reading.
I. CONTINUED BUSINESS: .
1. Recycled report from the City Manager
Npt Bch
dated February 13, 1989 concerning the
Cnf /Vstr;
NEWPORT BEACH CONFERENCE AND VISITORS
Bureau
BUREAU (CONTRACT NO. 2638), was
C -2638
.presented.
(38)
Copy of City Council Minutes of
February 13, 1989, pertaining to the
Newport Beach Conference and Visitors
Bureau.
Random survey of contributions to the
Newport Beach Conference and Visitors.
Bureau.
Report and goals from the Newport Beach
Conference and Visitors Bureau, dated
May 1, 1989.
Volume 43 - Page 193
III
C
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
a
\FV
May 8, 1989
After the agenda was printed, report
from Laventhol & Horwath dated April 28,
1989 was presented to Council Members .
with cover letter from Jim Dale, Newport
Beach Conference and Visitors Bureau.
Jim Dale, 118 Apolena, member of the
Board of Directors of the Newport Beach
Conference and Visitors Bureau ( NBCVB),
addressed the Council, and requested 10
minutes in which to give their complete
presentation including slides. He began
by illustrating the reasons why the City
established the NBCVB - -to identify the
visitors attracted by said bureau, and
review its activities, as follows:
Today, the City of Newport Beach
has 2500 first -class hotel and
motel rooms, and the $4 million
revenue generated during 1988 for
the City's general fund came from a
65% occupancy rate; therefore, the
unoccupied rooms represented an
incredible revenue generating
opportunity for the City. The NBCVB
was established as a professional
marketing organization to ensure the
dividend of this resource to the
citizens of Newport Beach, and
represents pure profit to the City to
fund the services the residents
expect -- it is the payoff for the
City's years of planning. With
Newport Beach's extraordinary
environment and high quality of its
revenue - generating hospitality
industry, the NBCVB introduces the
City to the "perfect visitor," who
invisibly spends over $225 per day,
and leaves no footprints on our
beaches. The collaboration of the
NBCVB and the City to attract the
"perfect visitor" represents the
best of private industry and local
government, and the self- funding 1%
visitor service fee, which the
NBCVB pays the City to collect,
still leaves to the residents of
the City the 8% Transient Occupancy
Tax (TOT). The Laventhol & Horwath
report clearly indicates the City
is getting.a good return from its
visitor service fee compared to
what other cities spend on
marketing services, and despite
aggressive competition from
surrounding cities, the revenue
from Newport's TOT is up 16% from
one year ago. During the past nine
months, the NBCVB has booked over
Volume 43 - Page 194
Npt Bch
Cnf /Vstrs
Bureau
Ed
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
EMBERS MINUTES
A �
�� aW May 8, 1989 INDEX
10,000 rooms, which translates to
Npt Bch
more than $2.2 million in gross
Cnf /Vstrs
sales coming into Newport Beach
Bureau
from the "perfect visitor." Future
bookings through the Bureau's
efforts total more than 41,000
rooms, equaling over $9 million of
new growth revenue coming into
Newport Beach, of which the NBCVB
has contributed $100,000 to the
City's transportation fund, and
will continue to contribute $50,000
annually to that very important
fund.
In summary, Mr. Dale stated that the
NBCVB requests the Council to allow the
Bureau to continue to capitalize on the
"fantastic revenue - generating"
opportunities, and their specific
objectives for 1989 are to:
- Increase revenues by 18 %;
- Create and maintain an awareness
of Newport Beach as a destination
for business and leisure guests;
- Increase support of community
promotion and events; and
establish a better dialogue with
the Newport Beach elected
officials and staff;
- Within four years increase the
occupancy rate to 75 %, which will
mean gross revenues of more than
$22 million to the local
businesses of Newport Beach, and
a TOT of $861,000 over the
present level, and sales tax
revenue of $124,800 over its
present.level.
Jeff Morris, 1806 Port Ashley Place,
President of the Newport Beach
Conference and Visitors Bureau,
addressed the Council and asked that the
City Council disallow the proposed
ordinance and direct the staff to draft
an amendment to the February, 1987
agreement between the City and the
Bureau to allow the Bureau to continue
operating uninterrupted for a period of
three years. He added, that at the
conclusion of the three year period the
Council could then review the
organization's effectiveness and either
allow it to continue or terminate the
funding. He explained that they ask for
Volume 43 - Page 195
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
G�Z CGS. 9 9� G♦ 9�
L CALL 9 N May 8, 1989
E
C7
MINUTES
three years because it will realisti-
cally take that long before the
marketing and direct sales efforts can
be really felt, and in addition, the
multi -year commitment on the part of the
City is vital when attempting to attract
a top -notch executive director.
Discussion ensued, wherein Mayor Strauss
complimented the Bureau on their
marketing presentation and professional-
ism with regard to the Laventhol &
Horwath report, but stated that he did
not feel the City should continue the
tax, and is still opposed to it as he
feels it is an improper use of the
City's taxing authority to help one
class of private business, namely the
hotels. With regard to the Laventhol &
Horwath report, Mayor Strauss stated
that not one of the cities used in the
comparison are in Orange County, and
that there are no cities in Orange
County that take part of the occupancy
tax and allocate it to a convention and
visitors bureau; that the City's
occupancy rate in 1988 was 64.6%
according to the report, compared to the
surrounding cities with a total of
64.2 %, and these cities do not have a
similar tax imposed. He cited that on
Page 5 of the report it states: "It is
difficult to assess the impact of the
NBCVB based on a comparison of the
growth of Newport Beach hotels'
available and occupied room - nights to
aggregated numbers for the major hotels
in the surrounding communities (Costa
Mesa, Santa Ana and Irvine)." Mayor
Strauss further cited that one big
impact on City services stems from the
use of the airport, and the visitors who
get here use that service, and also the
traffic and parking generated by those
visitors attending conferences, golf
tournaments, picnics, etc. He added
that the financial benefits are
uncertain and are offset by the use of
the foregoing mentioned services.
In summary, Mayor Strauss slated he is
not against private industry, but his
principal objection is that it is an
improper tax designed to help private
business interests, and suggested that
the NBCVB be combined with other local
hotels outside of Newport Beach, and if
the 1% service fee or tax is done away
with, the hotels could lower their price
if they wish; use it for advertising; or
add to their profits, and that the
Chamber of Commerce is the place where
Volume 43 - Page 196
Npt Bch
Cnf /Vstrs
Bureau
Motion
Motion
0
x
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
x
MINUTES
May 8, 1989
the NBCVB should be housed and
supervised. He also feels that the
NBCVB should not be "saddled" with the
trolley business, and that it is time to
have a broader overall City -wide
management transportation program.
In view of the above, Mayor Strauss made
a motion to introduce and pass to second
reading on May 22, 1989, a proposed
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REPEALING SECTION
3.28 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO VISTOR SERVICE FEE
ORDINANCE; the repeal to be effective
six months from this date so that the
Newport Beach Conference and Visitors
Bureau have time to reorganize.
Discussion ensued, wherein substitute
motion was made to disallow the proposed
ordinance; that the Newport Beach
Conference and Visitors Bureau be
allowed a three -year period of time to
operate their business; and approve
their 1989 -90 Budget and Marketing Plan.
Council Member Watt stated that she
could not support the substitute motion,
but if it fails, and the main motion
fails, she believes that she could
support an interim proposal. She added
that because of the impacts from
visitors the City is struggling for
transportation money, money for airport
studies and for transportation
management consultants, and believes
that all of the TOT should go toward
impacts on the City from visitors, and
if this is not the case, then more of
the 1% sales tax should be applied to
these impacts. She suggested that the
Newport Beach Conference and Visitors
Bureau be allowed a two -year period to
accomplish their goals and then be
reevaluated.
Discussion ensued, wherein the Newport
Beach Conference and Visitors Bureau
contract and the use of the 1% service
fee will be addressed at a future
meeting.
Council Member Hart, in her concern
regarding the collection of a
substantial amount of money, ($600,OOOt
per year) suggested that someone from
the City Council be an ad hoc member to
the Board of Directors of the Newport
Beach Conference and Visitors Bureau, as
any time that a City is using a
Volume 43 - Page 197
Bch
/Vstrs
h
Ayes
Noes
E
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
\OtoD S May 8, 1989
xlxlxlxlxlxlx
MINUTES
perceived tax, they are going to have to
have hands -on and be able to review that
particular budget.
The City Attorney suggested that when
the contract comes back, the Council
will have an opportunity to address that
particular issue.
The substitute motion, as presented in
the foregoing, was voted on and carried.
J. CURRENT BUSINESS:
Npt Bch
Cnf /Vstrs
Bureau
1. Report from Parks, Beaches and Npt Aquatic
Recreation Commission concerning dock Ctr
construction, dredging and excavation at C -2637
the NEWPORT AQUATIC CENTER (CONTRACT NO. (38)
2637), was presented.
The City Manager addressed the Council,
stating that since the most recent
meetings, and up -to -date dialogue of the
Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Commission, representatives of the
Aquatic Center, and others concerned
about disposal of dredged materials onto
North Star Beach, the following
recommendation to the City Council was
agreed upon:
"1. Approximately 1500 cubic years
of material will be
accommodated and retained for
the foundation of the Phase
Two building;
2. Additional material will be
stockpiled within the Aquatic
Center's lease boundaries at
an elevation not to exceed 6'
above the Phase Two
foundation's elevation in a
manner which will not impinge
upon the riparian area;
3. Any excess material not
accommodate as described in
Items 1 & 2 will be stockpiled
westerly of the present
Aquatic Center facilities at
the base of the hill;
4. All material referred to as
"stockpiled" and as described
in Items 2 and 3 will be
removed off site through a
brokering process over a
maximum period of two years.
The City will administer the
brokering process;
Volume 43 - Page 198
Motion
All Ayes
0
x
G
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 8, 1989
5. The material resulting from
any future maintenance
dredging shall be accommodated
offsite at the Aquatic
Center's expense; and
6. All material to be deposited
onsite shall be monitored by
appropriate state and federal
agencies and that
documentation shall be
available for public
inspection."
Motion was made to approve the subject
application with the foregoing
conditions.
Meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
ATTEST:
ty
The agenda for this meeting was
posted on May 4, 1989, at 9:00
a.m., on the City Hall Bulletin
Board located outside of the City
of Newport Beach Administration
Building.
Volume 43 — Page 199
pt Aquatic
tr