HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/24/1993 - Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
�O REGULAR _
eI: Council Chambers
TIME: 7:00 P. M. ��� \�\ � \\ S
DATE: May 24, 1993
.Present
.Motion
.Ayes
Ainei
n
All Ayes
•
Motion
All Ayes
•
x I x I x I X I x I x I x I ROLL CALL
R
Reading of Minutes of Adjourned Meetings of
May 5 and 12, 1993; and Regular Meeting of May
10, 1993, was waived, approved as written, and
ordered filed.
Reading in full of all ordinances and
resolutions under consideration was waived,
and the City Clerk was directed to read by
titles only.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Mayor Turner opened the continued public
hearing on APPEAL OF AVE% REALTY
CORPORATION FOR RESUBDIVISION NO. 997
from request of Penco Engineering, Inc.,
applicant to resubdivide two existing
parcels of land into three parcels for
conveyance purposes, located in the APF-
H District, 210 Newport Center Drive, on
property bounded by San Miguel Drive,
Avocado Avenue, Farallon Drive, Anacapa
Drive and Newport Center Drive in
Newport Center.
Report from the Planning Department.
Recycled appeal application from Avex
Realty Corp.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, a packet of
information was received from Michael
Burnett, attorney representing the
appellant, urging City Council
disapprove Resubdivision No. 997.
The City Manager reported that based on
information received earlier in the day
to City Attorney Burnham, it is
recommended this item be continued to
June 14, 1993.
Hearing no objections, motion was made
to continue this public hearing to
June 14, 1993.
2. Mayor Turner opened the public hearing
regarding proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -9,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF TITLE
14 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL
CODE REGARDING SETTING THE BASIC
WATER QUANTITY RATE AT $1.69 PER
HUNDRED CUBIC FEET; AND MODIFYING
THE "WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
CHARGES" FOR LAND DEVELOPMENTS TO
$2,950 PER ACRE.
Report from the Utilities Department.
Jeff Staneart, Utilities Director,
summarized the proposal which is an
increase of 35 cents per hundred cubic
feet of water, and is a 26% increase in
the basic water rate. He noted that
Metropolitan Water District's price to
the City is increasing by 20% effective
July 1, 1993. He also cited the four
Volume 47 - Page 107
MINUTES
INDEX
Resub 997
(84)
Ord 93 -9
Utilities
Basic Wtr
Qnty Rate
(89)
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
R
Reading of Minutes of Adjourned Meetings of
May 5 and 12, 1993; and Regular Meeting of May
10, 1993, was waived, approved as written, and
ordered filed.
Reading in full of all ordinances and
resolutions under consideration was waived,
and the City Clerk was directed to read by
titles only.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Mayor Turner opened the continued public
hearing on APPEAL OF AVE% REALTY
CORPORATION FOR RESUBDIVISION NO. 997
from request of Penco Engineering, Inc.,
applicant to resubdivide two existing
parcels of land into three parcels for
conveyance purposes, located in the APF-
H District, 210 Newport Center Drive, on
property bounded by San Miguel Drive,
Avocado Avenue, Farallon Drive, Anacapa
Drive and Newport Center Drive in
Newport Center.
Report from the Planning Department.
Recycled appeal application from Avex
Realty Corp.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, a packet of
information was received from Michael
Burnett, attorney representing the
appellant, urging City Council
disapprove Resubdivision No. 997.
The City Manager reported that based on
information received earlier in the day
to City Attorney Burnham, it is
recommended this item be continued to
June 14, 1993.
Hearing no objections, motion was made
to continue this public hearing to
June 14, 1993.
2. Mayor Turner opened the public hearing
regarding proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -9,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF TITLE
14 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL
CODE REGARDING SETTING THE BASIC
WATER QUANTITY RATE AT $1.69 PER
HUNDRED CUBIC FEET; AND MODIFYING
THE "WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
CHARGES" FOR LAND DEVELOPMENTS TO
$2,950 PER ACRE.
Report from the Utilities Department.
Jeff Staneart, Utilities Director,
summarized the proposal which is an
increase of 35 cents per hundred cubic
feet of water, and is a 26% increase in
the basic water rate. He noted that
Metropolitan Water District's price to
the City is increasing by 20% effective
July 1, 1993. He also cited the four
Volume 47 - Page 107
MINUTES
INDEX
Resub 997
(84)
Ord 93 -9
Utilities
Basic Wtr
Qnty Rate
(89)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
d' May 24, 1993
ROLL CRLL
MINUTES
Q111*
factors necessitating the water rate
Utilities
increase as enumerated in his report.
Council Member Hedges, Member of the
Utilities Committee, referred to Council
Policy M -5, Water Rates, which states
•
that the water rate structure shall
provide sufficient income to cover
certain annual costs such as water
purchased from MWD; operation and
maintenance of the water system; water
system betterment and improvements;
reserve for water quality; water for
City parks, buildings, highway
landscaping; sewer and storm drain
flushing; and fire fighting, system
losses, and operating reserves.
However, in reviewing how the water
expenses were calculated, he noticed
that funds were included for salaries
and the Geobase Information System
(GIS), etc., which are items not
provided for in Council Policy M -5. He
stated he is not against a water rate
increase, but he does not think the
water fund should be paying for salaries
not associated with provisional water.
In response to the above comments, Mr.
Staneart stated that in the past, the
City Council and Utilities Committee had
chosen to spread the costs of management
and operation of the Utilities
Department across the board. The GIS
positions included in the water fund
•
budget have been reclassified to more
accurately reflect their duties in
recent years, and the manager of the GIS
project is a 24 -year employee of the
Utilities Department who started out in
computers, mapping, and drawings, and
keeping those records for the water
department is a primary function of that
individual.
Council Member Hedges also referenced
expenditures of other items he felt did
not conform to Council Policy M -5, to
which Mr. Staneart responded that they
are part of the City's sewer system.
Council Member Cox stated he felt some
of Council Member Hedges' points are
worthy of evaluation; however, he felt
those concerns dealt more with
accounting practices than just
personnel, and that in the future, the
City should look at an improved method
of accounting so it doesn't look like
the City is hiding such items.
Hearing no one wishing to address the
Council on this matter, the public
hearing was closed.
•
Council Member Sansone stated that it
has been his desire for many years to
have a policy whereby the basic water
rate is set at 10 units to take care of
the low water users, and then escalates
depending on how much is used (the more
water you use, the more you pay).
Volume 47 - Page 108
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
May 24, 1993
ROLL CRLL
Motion x
•
Motion x
Ayes
Noes
Ayes
No
•
i7
x
X
i x
Hearing no other comments, motion was
made to adopt Ordinance Ho. 93 -9.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hedges, Mr. Staneart
clarified the purpose of the water
capital improvement charge of $2,950 set
forth in the proposed ordinance.
Council Member Hedges stated he felt it
was important to "get the numbers
right," and therefore, moved a
substitute motion to refer the subject
ordinance to the Utilities Committee for
report back on June 14, 1993.
If the adoption of the subject ordinance
is postponed, staff pointed out that
inasmuch as the subject ordinance has to
be adopted 30 days prior to ,becoming
effective, one water billing period
would be missed in the next fiscal year.
Mayor Turner and Council Members Sansone
and Hart indicated the City Council
should adopt the ordinance at this time
as written, but refer the method of
accounting back to the Utilities
Committee for further study.
Following consideration, the substitute
motion was voted on and FAILED.
The motion made by Council Member
Sansone was voted on and carried.
Mayor Turner opened the public hearing
regarding proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -10,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING TITLE 20 OF THE NEWPORT
BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO
INCREASE THE PERMITTED 3 FOOT
HEIGHT 7 FOR FENCES, WALLS,
HEDGES, AND SCREEN PLANTING WITHIN
THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACKS
IN SPECIFIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,
AS WELL AS THAT OF ARCHITECTURAL
FEATURES SUCH AS PILASTERS, GATES
AND LIGHT FIXTURES (EXCEPT WITHIN
REQUIRED SIGHT DISTANCE
TRIANGLES); ADD LANGUAGE TO
SECTION 20.02.070 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE SO AS TO REQUIRE A SIGHT
DISTANCE TRIANGLE AT THE
INTERSECTION OF STREETS AND
DRIVEWAYS; AND AN AMENDED SIGHT
DISTANCE AREA AT STREET
INTERSECTIONS; AND DELETE THE
REQUIREMENT FOR A USE PERMIT FOR
FENCES IN SPECIFIC LOCATIONS,
SINCE SUCH FENCING IS CURRENTLY
REVIEWED BY THE MODIFICATIONS
COMMITTEE (PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDMENT NO. 777).
Report from the Planning Department.
Volume 47 - Page 109
MINUTES
INDEX
Utilities
Ord 93 -10
Zoning
(94)
PCA 777
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
�KP May 24, 1993
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
INDEX
William Laycock, Current Planning
Zoning
Manager, outlined the proposed amendment
as set forth in the staff report, and
noted there are predominantly three
areas within the City that exhibit
perpetual nonconformities with regard to
•
the 3 foot height limit for fences and
walls within the required front yard
setbacks. These areas consist of Balboa
Island, Old Corona del Mar, and Balboa
Peninsula/West Newport.
Mr. Laycock answered questions of
Council Member Watt relative to how the
proposed amendment would affect certain
properties on Balboa Island.
Mr. Laycock also pointed out that the
ordinance does not include the areas of
Newport Heights or Cliff Haven as
questioned by Council Member Hart.
Discussion ensued among the Council
Members, and following consideration and
hearing no one wishing to address the
Council on this matter, the public
hearing was closed.
Motion
x
Motion was made by Council Member
Sansone to adopt Ordinance No. 93 -10.
Motion
x
Substitute motion was made by Council
Member Watt that Balboa Island be
excluded from the proposed ordinance at
this time.
•
Mr. Laycock noted that public notices
regarding the ordinance under
consideration were mailed to all
affected homeowner associations with no
response.
Council Member Watt indicated she felt
the proposed amendments should be
"examined" with the Balboa Island
Homeowners Association prior to
adoption.
It was noted by the City Attorney that
if Balboa Island were excluded from the
ordinance, it would have to be
reintroduced at this time and passed to
second reading on June 14, 1993.
Following discussion, Council Member
Watt withdrew her substitute motion.
Council Member Hedges suggested an
amendment to the original motion whereby
the language in Section 20.02.071 is
revised to read: "the upper 2 feet of
which must be at least 40% open" rather
than the upper 3 feet....
yes
Following further consideration, Council
Member Hedges withdrew his amendment,
and the motion as made by Council Member
Sansone, was voted on and carried.
Volume 47 - Page 110
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
May 24, 1993
ROLL CRLL INDEX
4. Mayor Turner opened the public hearing
Ord 93 -11
regarding proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -11,
Business
being,
License Tx
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
(40)
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADDING SECTION 5.08.005; AND
•
AMENDING SECTIONS 5.08.010, 020,
022 AND RESCINDING SECTION 024 OF
THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO BUSINESS LICENSE
TAX.
Recycled report from Revenue Manager,
dated May 10, 1993.
The City Manager summarized the purpose
of the proposed business license tax
increase, noting that due to the
anticipated loss of revenue in property
taxes resulting from the adoption of the
State's budget and that impact on the
City last fiscal year as well as this
fiscal year, it has caused the City to
re- examine its budgetary process and to
look at all options, including
reductions and increase in fees and
taxes. Anticipating that this proposal
would be rather controversial with the
business community, the staff, since the
first of this year, has been meeting
regularly with the Chamber of Commerce
Budget Task Force as well as the City's
Economic Development Committee on this
proposal. The last increase to the
business license tax was approved in
•
1977, and if the proposed ordinance is
approved, it is anticipated $1 million
will be generated in additional revenue.
He outlined the proposed tax structure
as enumerated in the staff report and
answered questions of the Council.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Debay regarding licensing
requirements for persons selling real
estate, the City Manager stated it is
not the intent of the ordinance to
require that each individual selling
real estate obtain a business license.
However, a license is required for the
real estate office itself.
Hearing no one wishing to address the
Council, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
x
Motion was made by Council Member Turner
to adopt Ordinance No. 93 -11.
Council Member Hedges, Member of the
Budget Committee, stated the
justification for the proposed business
tax increase is to create additional
revenue due to the State's budget
shortfall, and inasmuch as the City
Council will not be adopting the next
year's budget until June 14, he felt it
was premature to pass this tax increase
for the following reasons:
1) the City has not yet fully
developed all the revenue
producing potential on City -owned
property;
Volume 47 - Page 111
COUNCIL MEMBERS
101:110
•
Ayes x
Noes x
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
2) the City has not clearly
demonstrated that it has made the
cuts to the organization to
support such a tax increase; and
3) the decline in municipal
revenues due to the recession is
not justification for a tax
increase from an economic
standpoint.
Council Member Hedges urged that the
City Council defer action on the
proposed business license tax increase
until the new budget is approved on
June 14.
Council Member Watt indicated she felt
Council Member Hedges' comments were
somewhat "out of line," inasmuch as
there are several committees working
diligently on income producing
properties, and due to the fact that
this City is way behind of other cities
as to what the current business license
fees should be.
Mayor Turner and Council Member Debay
also indicated their support of the
proposed tax increase.
Hearing no other comments, the motion
was voted on and carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
John Lewis, Attorney representing former
Police Department employee Rochelle
Maier, addressed the Council regarding
the request on the agenda by Arb
Campbell, former Police Chief, for a
hearing. He stated that he does not
think the City Council should grant Mr.
Campbell a hearing, but if the request
is granted, he felt it should be a
separate hearing from Tony Villa's, and
it should remain open to the public.
Also, if Mr. Campbell is granted a
hearing before the Civil Service Board,
then the documentation gathered during
the investigation of the sexual
harassment issue should be released and
out into the open, and further, if both
hearings are combined, then he felt his
client Rochelle Maier should be included
in that hearing.
In response to the above remarks, the
City Attorney noted the following: Mr.
Lewis represents the 10 plaintiffs in
the two lawsuits against the City;
Mr.Campbell is entitled to a hearing
pursuant to the Peace Officers Bill of
Rights; Mr. Lewis did represent Rochelle
Maier who was a probationary police
officer with the Newport Beach Police
Department, but who was rejected before
she satisfactorily completed probation;
she also requested that the Civil
Service Board take jurisdiction over the
dismissal, but the Board ruled that a
probationary employee does not have the
right to appeal to the Civil Service
Board, and that Rochelle Meyer does not
have the right to an AB301, or Peace
Volume 47 - Page 112
MINUTES
Business
License Tx
PD /Sexual
Harassment
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
�
� f
�,r � May 24, 1993
CRLL
•
•
is
Officer procedural Bill of Rights
hearing, all of which Mr. Lewis is aware
of; what Mr. Lewis has stated is based
on emotion and innuendos and not based
on fact.
Richard Thompson, private investigator
with John Lewis' firm, addressed the
Council and stated that he was a former
police officer with the City of Newport
Beach and worked with Arb Campbell and
Tony Villa for a number of years. He
stated he personally does not like Mr.
Campbell and cautioned the City Council
to not let their personal feelings
interfere with what decisions must be
made with respect to the request for a
hearing by Arb Campbell.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items were approved except for
those items removed:
ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
Schedule for public hearing on June 14, 1993:
5. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
6. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -13, being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING A PORTION OF DISTRICTING
MAPS NO. 36, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44
AND 61 SO AS TO RECLASSIFY THE
SANTA ANA HEIGHTS AND EASTBLUFF
PARCELS OF THE UPPER NEWPORT BAY
REGIONAL PARE PROPERTY FROM THE
UNCLASSIFIED R -3 -B AND R -4 -B -2
DISTRICTS TO THE PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT (PLANNING COMIIISSION
AMENDMENT NO. 779). [Report from
the Planning Department]
RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION
7. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
8. Resolution Ho. 93 -35 approving an
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE
DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND
QATERWAYS /BALBOA YACHT BASIN
RECONSTRUCTION LOANS CONTRACT 30. 2370.
[Report from the Marine Department]
9. Resolution No. 93 -36 BAYSIDE MOBILE HOME
PARR FINANCING OPTIONS. [Report from
City Manager]
(Mayor Turner announced for the benefit
of those in the audience, that by
approving the above resolution, it only
authorizes staff to investigate their
proposal, ascertain what the facts are,
and bring back a recommendation to the
Council. He emphasized that the action
taken does not in any way mean it is a
"done - deal. ")
Volume 47 - Page 113
MINUTES
Ord 93 -13
Zoning
(45/94)
779
CA State/
Bal Yacht
Ban Rcnstr
Res 93 -35
C- 2370(38)
Finance/
Bayside MH:
Res 93 -36
(40)
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL CFLL`i�s
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
MINUTES
INDEX
10. Resolution No. 93 -37 establishing
TElIPORARY PARKING RESTRICTIONS for the
two City -owned lots on the west end of
Seashore Drive, the lot at the corner of
Superior and Pacific Coast Highway, and
the City Hall Parking lot.
•
11. Resolution No. 93 -38 approving the
TEMPORARY INSTALLATION OF CUL DR SACS
along Seashore Drive during the 4th of
July Holiday.
12. Resolution No. 93 -39 authorizing sworn
officers of the Newport Beach Police
Department to CLOSE ALL OR A PORTION OF
SEASHORE DRIVE, NEWPORT BOULEVARD,
BALBOA BOULEVARD AND SELECTED FEEDER
STREETS during the 4th of July weekend.
CONTRACTS /AGREEML+NTS
13. Authorize execution of Professional
Service Agreement with Centinela
Hospital's Fitness Institute to provide
FIREFIGHTERS with EXECUTIVE HEALTH AND
FITNESS EVALUATIONS. [Memorandum from
the Fire Chief]
14. READILY ACHIEVABLE ADA ALTERATIONS (C-
2934) AND PRIORITY STRUCTURAL ADA
ALTERATIONS (C -2941) - Authorize the
Mayor and the City Clerk to execute
consultant agreements with the firms of
Hutson & Rome Partnership and LEESAK
•
Architects AIA, Inc. [Report from the
Public Works Department]
15. AMENDMENTS TO NEWPORT DUNES SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. 2394 - Authorize
execution of proposed amendments
contained in the staff report. [Report
from the City Attorney]
16. NEWPORT BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION CONTRACT N0. 2056 AND
NEWPORT BEACH POLICE MANAGEMENT
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION CONTRACT NO.
2932/MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING -
Approve subject Memorandums of
Understanding. [Recycled report from
the City Manager dated May 5, 1993]
17. PROSECUTION SERVICES FROM THE ORANGE
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
CONTRACT NO. 2031 - Approve contract to
allow the District Attorney to
criminally prosecute for violations of
the City's ordinances (continuation of
an on -going contractual relationship).
[Memorandum from the Assistant City
Attorney]
18. CLAIMS - For Denial by the City Manager:
Jaklin T. Merciyan for damage to vehicle
•
on May 12, 1993, as a result of spilled
paint on Newport Boulevard and Hospital
Road.
Bernard J. Piazza for Kailene S. Piazza
for reimbursement of Seals Ambulance
service as a result of Kailene breaking
her arm on March 3, 1993, while playing
handball at the Community Youth Center
Handball activity.
Volume 47 - Page 114
INDEX
COUNCIL MEMBERS
•
•
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
David A. Rideout for damages as a result
of being detained and handcuffed, cited
on May 6, 1993, allegedly for removing
trash from refuse cans in alley at 2400
W. Ocean Front, and then released.
Joseph Tortorello for property damages
as a result of toilets overflowing with
raw sewage on July 4, 1992 at 309 32nd
Street.
John M. Vasquez for personal injuries as
a result of trip and fall on Pacific
Coast Highway at Poppy Avenue on
November 8, 1992.
Steven L. Vensand for damage to vehicle
as a result of sprinklers on dirt hill
going off mid -day on May 6, 1993, Avon
Street parking lot next to Stuft Noodle
Restaurant.
Sidney Wald/United Services Auto
Association, Western Regional Office for
reimbursement for damages to vehicle as
a result of being hit by City refuse
truck on April 12, 1993, on Pacific
Coast Highway and Bayside Drive.
Julie Walker/Ed Montoya for damages
alleging condition of roadway at
MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street
caused the accident on November 22,
1992.
19. Public Hearing Scheduled for June 14,
1993 - Refer to report ;W/agenda item 6
for:
A. General Plan Amendment No. 92-3(E) -
Request to amend the Land Use and
Circulation Elements of the General Plan
so as to increase the allowable size of
the proposed Interpretive Center on the
Westbay parcel of the Upper Newport Bay
Regional Park site from 8,000 sq. ft. to
10,000 sq. ft. and delete a secondary
bicycle trail along the westbay parcel;
and the acceptance of an Environmental
Document; and
B. Local Coastal Program Amendment No.
31 - Request to amend the Local Coastal
Program Land Use Plan so as to increase
the allowable size of the proposed
Interpretive Center on the Westbay
parcel of the Upper Newport Bay Regional
Park site from 8,000 sq. ft. to 10,000
sq. ft.; and
C. Planning Commission Amendment No. 779
(Ordinance introduction) - Request to
amend a portion of Districting Maps No.
36, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44 and 61 so as to
redesignate portions of the Upper
Newport Bay Regional Park property from
the U (Unclassified) District, R -3 -B and
R -4 -B -2 Districts to the PC (Planned
Community) District; and
Volume 47 - Page 115
MINUTES
(I X4
Auto
ted
'IPA 92 -3(E)
Upr Npt Bay
Reg Prk
(45/94)
31
779
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
May 24, 1993
INDEX
D. Use Permit No. 3488 - Request to U/P
3488
approve a General Development Plan and
Resource Management Plan for the Upper
Newport Bay Regional Park, which would
serve as a Planned Community Development
•
Plan and regulations for the regional
park.
20. Public hearing for June 14, 1993 -
1993 -94
ANNUAL BUDGET FOR 1993 -1994, pursuant to
Budget
Section 1102 of the Newport Beach City
Charter. [Memo from Finance Director]
21. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
22. RESUBDIVISION NO. 955 - Approve the
Resub 955
improvement plans and specifications,
(84)
and accept the public improvements
constructed in conjunction with
Resubdivision No. 955, located at 229
and 231 Via Lido Soud, on the
southwesterly side of Via Lido Soud,
across from Via Cordova on Lido Island;
authorize the City Clerk to release the
Faithful Performance Surety (City
National Bank Certificate of Deposit No.
18552) and release the Labor and
Material Surety (City National Bank
Certificate of Deposit No.18553) in six
months provided no claims have been
filed. [Report from the Public Works
Department]
23. SAN DIEGO CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL BICYCLE
S /Diego Cr)
BRIDGE OVER BONITO CREEK CONTRACT NO.
Reg Trl
•
2900 Approve the plans and
Bike Brdg
specifications for the subject project;
C -2900
and authorize the City Clerk to
advertise for bids to be opened on June
(38)
16, 1993, at 10:00 A.M. [Report from
the Public Works Department]
24. BALBOA PENINSULA STREET LIGHT
Bal Pnsla
REPLACEMENT (CONTRACT NO. 2925) -
St Lgt
Approve the plans and specifications;
Rplm
.and authorize the City Clerk to
C -2925
advertise for bids to be opened at 11:00
A.M. on June 16, 1993. [Report from the
(38)
Public Works Department]
25. 1992 -93 STREET AND MISCELLANEOUS SLURRY
1992 -93
SEAL AND RESURFACING PROGRAM CONTRACT
St /Misc
NO. 2938 - Approve the plans and
Slurry Sl
specifications; and authorize the City
C -2938
Clerk to advertise for bids be opened at
11:00 A.M. on June 17, 1993. [Report
(38)
from the Public Works Department]
26. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS AT VARIOUS
Trfc Sig
LOCATIONS CONTRACT NO. 2937 - Approve
Mod /Var
the plans and specifications; affirm
C -2937
Categorical Exemption; and authorize the
(38)
City Clerk to advertise for bids to be
opened at 10:00 a.m. on June 17, 1993.
[Report from the Public Works
•
Department /Traffic Engineering]
27. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
Volume 47 - Page 116
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
s+ � May 24, 1993
DLL CRLL INDEX -
28. LEGAL PUBLICATIONS FOR 3 -YEAR CONTRACT
Legal Adv/
COVERING FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 1993 TO
CClerk
JUNE 30, 1996 - Authorize the City Clerk
7/93 -6/96
to publish a notice advertising for bids
(32)
to be received on or before the hour of
4:00 p.m., on Thursday, June 10, 1993
for a 3 -year contract covering the
•
publishing and printing of legal
notices, or other material required to
be published in a newspaper of general
circulation published and circulated in
the City of Newport.
29. BIG CANYON RESERVOIR ELECTRIC CONTROL
Big Canyn
PANEL RECONSTRUCTION OF ELECTRIC
Res ELec
CONTROLS CONTRACT NO. 2923 - Approve the
Cntrl
plans and specifications and authorize
C -2923
the City Clerk to advertise for bids to
be opened at 10:30 a.m., June 16, 1993.
(38)
[Report from the Utilities Department]
30. FIRST AVENUE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT
1st Ave /Wtr
PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER
Mn Rplcm
PIPELINE CONTRACT NO. 2944 - Approve the
C -2944
plans and specifications; and authorize
(38)
the City Clerk to advertise for bids to
be opened at 10:45 a.m., June 16, 1993.
[Report from the Utilities Department]
31. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
32. (Item deleted)
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
•
AGENDA ITEM NO.
5. Report from the Revenue Manager /Finance
Ord 93 -12
Department recommending introduction of
UniformTOT
proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -12, being,
(40)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 3.16
OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL
CODE PERTAINING TO THE UNIFORM
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, a letter was
received from Balboa Beach Company in
opposition to the proposed ordinance.
A letter was also received from Newport
Mesa Board of Realtors expressing desire
to participate in discussion regarding
the proposed ordinance.
Council Member Debay stated that shd had
been contacted by a number of people in
the real estate industry who are
property managers for summer rentals,
and their concern is that they have
already accepted checks and issued
contracts for their rentals, and
therefore, would like the City Council
•
to not make the subject Ordinance
effective until September.
Volume 47 - Page 117
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Motion
Ayes
Abstaine
Motion
Motion
Ayes
Noes
IA
X
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
fflV1%
X
X
X I X I X I X I X I X
Hay 24, 1993
The City Manager advised that he had
talked with Council Member Debay
regarding this matter, and that possibly
a provision could be added to the
ordinance whereby if a summer rental
agreement had already been executed
prior to the effective date of the
ordinance, then the Uniform Transient
Occupancy Tax (UTOT) would not apply
until October 1, 1993.
Janice Schuller, 1207 Oxford Lane,
addressed the Council and stated she
has a real estate business at 603 E.
Balboa Boulevard, and that she books
summer rentals sometimes one year in
advance. She stated it would be most
appreciated if the City Council could
provide some type of a grace period in
the ordinance for summer rental
contracts currently executed.
Claudette Mann, 96 Corsica Drive,
Realtor, addressed the Council and
stated that since she just became aware
of the proposed ordinance, she would
like to study it further with her
committee between now and the public
hearing on June 14.
Following consideration, motion was made
to introduce and schedule for public
hearing on Jame 14, 1993, Ordinance No.
93 -12, with the proviso that the City
Attorney amend the ordinance to allow
some type of grace period for summer
rental contracts executed prior to a
specific date being exempt from paying
the UTOT this year.
7. Proposed Resolution No. 93 -34
establishing the ANNUAL BUSINESS TAX
RATES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 5.08 OF THE
NEVPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE.
Notion was made by Council Member Hedges
to table the subject resolution until
after adoption of the 1993 -94 budget.
Substitute motion was made by Council
Member Cox to adopt Resolution No. 93-
34.
Council Member Cox indicated he felt
there was no need to wait on approving
the proposed resolution, inasmuch as the
item has been discussed in depth by the
Budget Committee and the Ordinance
approving the new Business License Tax
has been adopted.
The substitute motion was voted on and
carried.
21. Report from Planning Department
regarding PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
ACTION OF MAY 6, 1993 AND AGENDA FOR MAY
20, 1993 for Council information and
approval.
Volume 47 - Page 118
MINUTES
INDEX
iniformTOT
BusLicTax/
Res 93 -34
(27)
Planning
(68)
COUNCIL MEMBERS
0%kX1&V1%
Motion
All Aye
•
r�
•
x
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
Motion was made by Mayor Turner to
schedule public hearings on June 28,
1993 for the following three items, and
to receive and file the remaining
actions: From the Planning Commission
Meeting of May 6, Item No. 2 (Use Permit
No. 3493) and Item No. 5 (Modification
No. 4056); and from the May 20 agenda,
Item No. 8 (Variance No. 1190).
27. Report for Council information and
approval from the General Services
Director with recommendations regarding
REFUSE PRIVATIZATION STUDY.
Dolores Otting, resident of Newport
Beach and representing Five -Star
Rubbish, addressed the Council
referencing the study done by SCS
Engineers, and noted one correction in
that the City of Costa Mesa pays the
land fill fee which is not reflected in
the report. As a result, Newport Beach
has one of the most cost effective
refuse rates in the County. She also
expressed her concern with the City
going to automated refuse pickup,
pointing out the weight and size of the
containers; how they must be in an exact
location for pickup or the barrels do
not get picked up; and how sightly they
look on the street. She expressed her
opposition to the proposal for automated
refuse pickup and urged the City Council
to consider this matter very carefully.
The City Manager noted that staff has
included in the 1993 -94 budget, the
lease purchase of automated trucks and
bins, as well as the retrofitting of an
existing piece of equipment, primarily
to have the funds set aside for when the
City is ready to begin the program. He
also agreed that prior to implementing
such a program, the City must sell the
idea to the public.
Madelene Arakelian, representing South
Coast Refuse, addressed the Council and
suggested consideration be given to
establishing a committee to deal with
refuse issues consisting of people in
the trash hauling business which she has
been involved in for over 40 years. She
discussed automated refuse pickup which
is being done in South Orange County and
stated the program is not being well -
received by its users. She also
indicated that the City should
investigate its contract with CR
Transfer for refuse recycling inasmuch
as the City's Refuse Division is not
taking all trash to CRT for disposal,
and as a result, the City is not
complying with AB939 relative to State
recycling requirements.
David Niederhaus, General Services
Director, in response to the above
comments regarding recycling, stated
that only the residential waste stream
material is taken to CRT, and that
refuse collected from street sweeping
Volume 47 - Page 119
DeLIAW
GS /Refuse
(44)
•
n
yes
COUNCIL MEMBERS
X
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
and beach cleaning goes to Sunset
Environmental Company. Approximately
35,000 tons are taken to CRT. With
respect to the proposed automated refuse
pickup program, he stated that he has
visited South Orange County where the
program is in place and found it is
normal during the first three to six
weeks in converting to automation, that
an unusually high level of complaints
are expected as people get used to the
new containers. He stated that he and
some of his staff are trying out the new
90 gallon containers at their homes and
it does take some getting used to; the
containers have solid wheels and are
guaranteed for 10 years; and the average
home will probably be able to get by
with either a 60 or 90 gallon container,
and will also be given an option for a
second container.
Mrs. Arakelian addressed the Council
again and emphasized her concern over
the City not complying with AB939
inasmuch as the Refuse department is not
taking all of the City's trash to only
one facility. She stated that the law
is very explicit in this regard and that
the General Services Department is in
noncompliance with AB939, and as a
result, it is not meeting the State
mandates. She urged that the City
Council investigate this matter further.
Mr. Neiderhaus responded that the reason
the entire residential waste stream does
not go to CRT is because the processing
equipment at CRT would become foul due
to street sweeping and beach type
litter. CRT segregate the City's
containers as the crews unload and
process whatever is required to make the
25% recycling requirement. If CRT
processes 50% of the City's waste
stream, and retain 35% on a daily basis,
then they have exceeded the monthly
basis. The other half of the equation
to meet AB939 is going to come from the
commercial side.
Mrs. Arakelian spoke in rebuttal by
stating that in order to comply with
AB939, the City should be taking 100%
tonnage overall (commercial and
residential combined) to one facility
for the 25% recycling requirement, and
because Newport Beach is only taking a
portion, it is not complying with that
law. She reiterated that other trash
haulers are "working their tail off" to
comply with all the requirements of
AB939, not just a portion.
Hearing no further comments, motion was
made to approve the recommendations
contained nnn the subject report.
31. Report from the Traffic Affairs
Committee, recommending the City Council
sustain the decision of the Committee
regarding the INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC
CONTROLS ON BAYSIDE AND EL PASEO DRIVES
AND THE SPEED LIMIT ON BAYSIDE DRIVE.
Volume 47 - Page 120
MINUTES
GS /Refuse
Trfc /Baysd
Drive
(85)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL C s May 24, 1993
•
•
•
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, two letters were
received in support of stop signs at the
above location from Mr. & Mrs. Sanford
Lewis, 1633 Bayside Drive, and D. W.
Whitney, 1311 Bayside Drive.
The Public Works Director presented the
subject report, noting that as a result
of a request from Gary Hamilton of 1621
Bayside Drive, as well as some other
residents in the area, the Traffic
Affairs Committee considered the request
for additional traffic controls on
Bayside Drive in the area of E1 Paseo
Drive. The principle elements of the
request were to decrease the speed limit
from E1 Paseo to Jamboree from the
present 35 MPH to 25 MPH, to install
more speed limit signs, and to install
stop signs at the intersection of E1
Paseo and Bayside Drives. The Traffic
Affairs Committee denied the majority of
the request with the exception of moving
one speed limit sign. He noted the
reasons for denial as enumerated in the
staff report, citing the most
significant reason being, the traffic
volumes at the subject intersection were
too low to meet warrants for the
installation of stop signs. In the case
of the speed limit from E1 Paseo Drive
to Jamboree Road, the State Vehicle Code
requires the speed limit of that type be
established in accordance with a traffic
and engineering survey.
Gary Hamilton, 1621 Bayside Drive,
addressed the Council and stated the
purpose of the request is to correct an
unsafe condition for both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in the area of El
Paseo Drive and Jamboree Road. It is
the only portion, of the two lane
portion, of Bayside Drive where there is
a speed limit posted in excess of 25
MPH. He stated he understands some of
the concerns of the Traffic Affairs
Committee; however, he felt that the
benefits to be derived from his request
far outweigh those concerns. He also
emphasized the need for a decrease in
speed limit to 25 MPH on Bayside Drive
due to vehicular and pedestrian traffic
who attend the Bahia Corinthian Yacht
Club and have to cross Bayside Drive to
get to the club.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Sansone, the City
Attorney stated that the only "down-
side" to approving the stop sign at the
subject location would be placing a sign
at a location where traffic warrants
have not been met. It could also set a
precedent for similar requests where
traffic warrants have not been met.
Volume 47 - Page 121
MINUTES
Trfc /Baysd
Drive
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
�O \% May 24, 1993
CflLL
•
Motion
All Ayes'',
•
.Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
•
x
x
x
It was also noted by staff that because
the subject area is zoned Multiple -
Residential, it is defined as commercial
in the California Vehicle Code and that
is the reason for the 35 MPH current
speed limit; however, this is an issue
that could be reviewed further if it is
the desire of the City Council.
Following discussion, motion was made to
overrule the decision of the Traffic
Affairs Committee, and adopt Resolution
No. 93 -40, approvin¢ the requested stop
sign, but that t e request for a
decrease in speed limit on Bayside Drive
from El Paseo Drive to Jamboree Road, be
referred back to the Traffic Affairs
Committee for further study.
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
33. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -8, being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AMENDING A DEVELOFMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AND THE IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN
SPACE AGREEMENT (DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT NO. 6).
Report from the Planning Department.
A supplemental report from the Planning
Department dated May 24, 1993 received
after the agenda was printed.
The City Manager advised that the
language that is before the City Council
as an addendum to the CIOSA Agreement
has been accepted by the staff of the
Coastal Commission.
Hearing no other comments, motion was
made by Council Member Watt to adopt
Ordinance No. 93 -8.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
34. Recycled report dated April 21, 1993
from the City Attorney, concerning ARB
CAMPBELL'S REQUEST FOR HEARING.
Recycled memorandum from Jeffrey M.
Epstein, Attorney for Arb Campbell.
At the request of the City Attorney,
motion was made by Mayor Turner to
continue this item to June 14, 1993.
35. Report from the Building Director
regarding APPEAL OF MARE. SCHULTHEIS
REQUESTING CITY COUNCIL TO WAIVE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT 406 ALISO
AVENUE.
Volume 47 - Page 122
MINUTES
Res 93 -40
Ord 93 -8
CIOSA /Dev
Agm No. 6
C -2920
(38)
C /Attorney
(31)
Building/
Schultheis
Appeal
(26)
k I
XX
•
M
Al yes
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
\ \\ May 24, 1993
x
It was noted by the City Manager that
the owner of property at 406 Aliso
Avenue, has sent a letter of appeal
requesting that the existing overhead
utilities be permitted to remain, rather
than undergrounding the electric service
as required by Section 15.32 of the
Municipal Code. The owner would like to
have the requirement waived until an
underground utility district is formed.
The owner's application for waiver of
the undergrounding requirement was
denied because inadequate reasons exist
to grant a variance from the Municipal
Code and the Building Department's
written policy and Section 15.32.015 of
the Municipal Code.
Mark Schultheis, appellant, 406 Aliso
Avenue, addressed the Council and stated
he is in the process of constructing a
new home on the site. He stated that all
of the electrical, cable, and telephone
service for approximately 24 homes in
his immediate area are overhead and in
the alley, and to place his utilities
underground would cost an additional
$2,000 with no practical benefit,
inasmuch as no other homes in the area
have their utilities underground. He
stated he would provide financial
assurance to the City for the
installation of underground utilities at
such time as it is required by the City
for all homeowners in his block.
Council Member Hart stated she has
viewed the subject site, and inasmuch as
the appellant has agreed to support an
underground utility assessment district
for his block at the appropriate time,
and because the installation of
underground utilities would create a
$2,000 financial hardship at this time,
she moved to waive such requirement and
grant the appeal.
Council Member Hedges recommended the
City Council review Section 15.32.015,
Underground Utilities, at a future study
session.
The City Manager advised that he will
refer this code section first to the
Underground Utilities Committee, and
then bring a report back to the Council
if there are no objections.
36. Report from the Public Works Department
concerning SAN JOAQUIN HILLS
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR - NEWPORT COAST
DRIVE TOLL ISSUE.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, three letters were
received regarding the proposed tollway
and the proposed location of the tollway
booth from Harbor View Hills South
Homeowners Association, Eileen Forsberg
of Port Seabourne Way, and Jasmine Creek
Community Association.
Volume 47 - Page 123
MINUTES
Building
74)
Joaquii
s TC/
Cst Dr
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
id111LNdtMKAVkM] 4
�,��j� s-
S May 24, 1993
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
101-141
The Public Works Director outlined on a
SJHTC /Npt
map the options that are being studied
Cst Dr
in order to provide a toll free
Toll
extension of Newport Coast Drive to
connect with Bonita Canyon Road/Ford
Road. He stated the recommendation
•
contained in the staff report is for the
City to go on record as supporting
Alternative 3 (the most westerly
alignment), as a toll -free alternative.
However, there have been three concerns
voiced about this possibility which he
discussed. Those concerns being' the
community and political opposition in
the City of Irvine to a direct extension
of Culver Drive, the lack of a source of
funding for constructing the Newport
Coast Drive extension, and the extra
distance of the route. He advised that
the Irvine City Council is scheduled to
consider this matter tomorrow evening,
and there has been some indication that
they may support Alternative 3. With
respect to funding, he noted that the
County of Orange has made application to
the Measure M regional funding program
for funding of this extension. If all of
these elements come into place, there
should be a toll -free route, open and
available to traffic before the SJHTC is
completed and before the tolls are
imposed.
The Public Works Director advised that
if the Council is not satisfied with the
above recommendation, or if satisfactory
•
progress is not made, the following
actions could be taken:
1. Address a letter or
resolution to the TCA
requesting that the toll be
eliminated from the Newport
Coast Drive connection.
(Although the TCA has
informally indicated that
the toll cannot be
eliminated because of
financing commitments, this
request has not been
formally made by the City).
2. Investigate withdrawal from
the TCA. (If the Council
desires to pursue this
action, it may wish to ask
the City Attorney to report
on possible legal
ramifications).
The Public Works Director also indicated
that withdrawal from the TCA would not
likely result in the desired elimination
of the toll, and could have some
disadvantages to the City. The City's
•
participation in the TCA as a member
agency offers a better opportunity to
influence design issues and policies,
(other than the toll issue) than would
be the case if the City were a non-
member.
Volume 47 - Page 124
COflU,NCIL MEMBERS
s
ROLL CALL
•
•
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
Council Member Cox, Chairman of the
SJHTC Agency, summarized some of the
background history relative to the
Corridor when he became a resident of
the Harbor View Hills South area in
1970, and noted that when he ran for
City Council in 1980, his platform was
the importance of the SJHTC and Newport
Coast Drive (formerly Pelican Hill
Road). When it became clear that there
was no chance of ever obtaining State or
Federal funding to pay for the Corridor,
the State Legislature approved a toll
concept which has never been done in
California, and ultimately allowed the
construction of the Corridor. Since the
completion of Newport Coast Drive, there
has been a tremendous relief of traffic
from going through Corona del Mar. In
March of this year, the investment
community agreed that people will pay a
toll to drive on the Corridor, and by
using the Corridor, 16,000 vehicles a
day are being removed from Coast Highway
and the City's residential streets. He
emphasized the importance of Alternative
3, stating he felt it was a win -win
situation for everyone, and that "you
cannot get the cars off the road without
the Corridor, you cannot build the
Corridor without funds, and you cannot
fund it without tolls."
Yvonne Houssels, representing Harbor
View Hills South Homeowners Association,
as well as other associations in the
area, addressed the Council and stated
they are very concerned about the lack
of knowledge regarding the proposed toll
booth. They are not opposed to the
Corridor, but they are opposed to the
location of the toll booth. They do
agree that Newport Coast Drive provides
a tremendous relief for traffic through
Corona del Mar, but also felt that if a
toll booth in installed, people will not
pay the fee to use the road and go back
to their old routes, thereby defeating
the purpose.
Discussion ensued wherein the Public
Works Director pointed out that the bulk
of the traffic now using Pacific Coast
Highway and Newport Coast Drive does
originate from the South County and
commuters use these alternatives as
opposed to I -5. Most of that traffic,
when the Corridor is built, is going to
be on the Corridor itself.
Ron Hendrickson, 1911 Port Claridge
Place, addressed the Council in support
of Alternative 3. He stated he was
appreciative of the City's efforts with
regard to the Corridor, particularly the
leadership of Council Member Cox, and
felt that once the Corridor is
completed, it will be of great benefit
to the City. He also felt the issue of
the toll is something that will be
accepted by the commuters in time.
Volume 47 - Page 125
MINUTES
INDEX
SJHTC /Npt
Cst Dr Tol:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL CALL
S' May 24, 1993
MINUTES
INDEX
Council Member Sansone stated that he
SJHTC /Npt
has been a supporter of the Corridor
Cst Dr Tol:
since he was elected to the City
Council; however, there has been
digression on this issue inasmuch as the
entire time the Council was considering
•
the Corridor, the 1.6 miles of Newport
Coast Drive from MacArthur Boulevard to
the intersection of Bonita Canyon Road,
there was a definite impression left
with four members of the then City
Council that the actual intersection of
the Corridor with Newport Coast Drive
would be near the Bonita Canyon
intersection. When that was changed
"God only knows," but that was the
impression he and others had on the
Council as well as the former City
Manager. There was never an indication
that from Bonita Canyon Road to
MacArthur Boulevard there was going to
be a toll. With regard to proposed
Alternative 3, as late as February of
this year at a meeting of the TCA, there
were only two alternatives, but during
the last 90 days Alternative 3 was
suggested, and it is acceptable to him.
He also stated it is his understanding
that the proposed fifty cent toll will
increase to seventy -five cents within 2-
1/2 years. In concluding his remarks,
Motion
x
Council Member Sansone moved the
following action:
"It is the intention of the City
of Newport Beach to withdraw from
the SJHTCA effective July 30,
1993, unless the following steps
are accomplished:
1. Newport Coast Drive
extension southwest
alignment (Alternative 3)
as presented in the County
of Orange Environmental
Management letter to the
City of Newport Beach is
accepted by the City of
Irvine and the
Transportation Corridor
Agency.
2. Continue to work with the
County of Orange and with
the City of Irvine to
secure community acceptance
of the Newport Coast Drive
extension.
3. The County of orange,
Cities of Newport Beach and
Irvine, and Orange County
Transportation Authority
will secure funding for
construction of the Newport
Coast Drive Alternative 3.
Volume 47 - Page 126
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL CRLL s
E
i
C J
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
4. An agreement is consummated
that Newport Coast Drive
extension and New Ford Road
will be open for traffic
before Newport Coast Drive
is closed between the
Corridor /Newport Coast
Drive intersection and
MacArthur.
5. Corridor design
accommodates the Newport
Coast Drive extension
Alternative 3.
6. Ensure that the Master Plan
of Arterial Highways is
amended to reflect the
change.
"The Newport Beach City Council
will review on July 26, 1993, this
motion to withdraw from the
Transportation Corridor Authority
with final decision to be based
upon receipt of accomplishment of
the conditions cited above."
Mayor Turner referenced the preamble in
Council Member Sansone's motion
regarding the City's intention to
withdraw from the TCA on July 30, 1993
if the six conditions are not met, and
stated he could not support this
language, as he felt it would not help
the City to withdraw from the TCA. He
stated the Corridor will be built
whether the City is a part of it or not,
and for the City to withdraw at this
point doesn't accomplish anything, in
fact, it puts the City on the outside
looking in, similar to the City of
Laguna Beach. He felt Council Member
Sansone's six conditions are a good
"plan of action," but he felt that in
the long -term, it would be in the best
interests of the City to remain a member
of the TCA.
Council Member Debay stated that she
also supports the six conditions set
forth in Council Member Sansone's
motion, but cannot support the preamble
to withdraw from the TCA if those
conditions are not met. She stated that
what the City has already accomplished
by belonging to the TCA is very
impressive, i. a., 1) the Newport Irvine
Agreement in the environmental
downsizing from 8 -lanes to 6- lanes, 2)
the realignment of Ford Road, 3) the
MacArthur interchange, 4) the deletion
of the connection of San Joaquin Hills
Road to the Corridor. She felt there
will be significant decisions made in
the future by the agency members with
only 35% of the Corridor designed, and
she does not want to absent the City of
Newport Beach from that process.
Therefore, she strongly supports staying
in the agency.
Volume 47 - Page 127
MINUTES
INDEX
SJHTC /Npt
Cst Dr Tol:
COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 24, 1993
Council Member Hart spoke in support of
the preamble to the six conditions,
noting that it states "it is the City's
intention to withdraw - - - - ", it does
not state the City is dropping from the
• agency, and because of the City's real
concern it has had the last two months,
it has helped the entire County of
Orange focus on what needs to get done.
It has also stepped up actions taken by
the City of Irvine and the County.
Council Member Hedges indicated he felt
the preamble gave the motion "some
teeth," and also provides clear
direction to our representative on the
TCA (Council Member Cox), the desires of
the City Council, and clearly states
what the City wants to accomplish with
respect to the other entities involved
in the construction of the SJHTC.
Council Member Cox spoke in opposition
to the motion, noting the following:
this City has been involved in the
Corridor process for 20 years and has
accomplished a great deal of benefit to
the City with more to come; these
accomplishments did not occur because
the City threatened the agency and
"acted tough," but rather by cooperation
and being involved; he has been there
every step of the way, and does not
think it is in good taste or at all
• professional to threaten the agency in
order to get things done; the rest of
the cities in the County look at Newport
Beach like a "bunch of fools," and yet
this City is benefitting the most from
the Corridor; he does not disagree with
the six key points suggested by Council
Member Sansone because they have to
happen, they are right on target and we
must say those things, but to not be a
part of this negotiating process does
not buy the City anything, and as a
result, he does not support the
intention to withdraw from the TCA.
Mayor Turner asked Council Member
Sansone if he would consider deleting
the preamble from his motion, to which
he replied in the negative.
Council Member Hedges stated that the
negative action would be to summarily
withdraw from the TCA, whereas the
positive action is that which is
proposed by Council Member Sansone, and
the hundreds of letters received in
response to this important issue.
In response to the above, Council Member
Cox stated that he believes the public
• has been misinformed, and not been given
the facts. If the public were involved
in the process, he feels that the
Council would not be receiving those
kinds of letters.
Volume 47 - Page 128
MINUTES
SJHTC /Npt
Cst Dr Toll
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
S May 24, 1993
ROLL CRLL
Ayes
Noes
•
•
•
MINUTES
INDEX
I
x
x
x
There being no further discussion, the
x
x
x
motion was voted on and carried.
Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
,� at * tk tk sk yr yr �r * a• 9t 9t
The agenda for this meeting was posted
on May 20, 1993, at 8:45 a.m., on the
City Ball Bulletin Board located outside
of the City of Newport Beach
Administration Building.
May
ATTEST:
,�F�'4✓QC)�,
�3 6
City Clerk n "
y #i
Volume 47 - Page 129