Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/13/2000 - Regular Meeting0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Regular Meeting June 13, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX STUDY SESSION (Special Meeting) - 3:30 p.m. [Refer to separate minutes] - 6:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Absent: None Pledge of Allegiance - Mayor Pro Tem Adams. Invocation by Reverend Dr. William Flanagan, St. Andrews Presbyterian Church. • Presentation of Proclamations: 1) Recognizing Marine Safety Supervisor Mitch White for his heroic effort in saving the lives of Alex and Vicky Anaya on Sunday, May 28, 2000. 2) Recognizing Lifeguard Drew Balandis for his outstanding effort on Memorial Day, Monday, May 29, in making a Newport Beach lifeguard record of 80 rescues. 3) Recognizing Fire Captain Rich Thomas, Fire Paramedic Ron Gamble, Firefighters Mike Mullen, Terry Teale and Brett Sutherland, and the crews of Fire Engine 62, 64, 66, Truck 62 and 63, Medic Unit 62 and Battalion 6, for their heroic efforts in saving the lives of Sarah Weeks and Christine Arnold. Fire Captain Rich Thomas, Fire Paramedic Ron Gamble, Firefighter Mike Mullen, Firefighter Brett Sutherland, Firefighter Terry Teale, Fire Captains Dave Bowman, Todd Knipp, John Rupsa and Rick Zaccaro, Fire Engineers Dave Engelstad, Terry Hoiland, Jerry Lazar, Mike Novak, and Bob Webber, Fire Paramedic Ralph Restadius, and Firefighter Ron Larson were present to accept their Proclamations of Recognition. Status Report on the Newport Beach Public Library Foundation by Dave Carmichael, President. Dave Carmichael announced that Larry Spitz is the • incoming Library Foundation President. Mr. Carmichael reported that the memorandum of cooperation is in place and communication is going well between the Foundation and the Board of Library Trustees. He indicated that the Foundation is open for membership, is taking donations, and can be contacted by Volume 53 - Page 401 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • calling 717 -3890. He added that they are still located at the Central Library and concluded by reporting that a bulk of their $125,000 donation went toward online resources. Larry Spitz stated that the Foundation is now looking forward to providing additional funds to the library system. He indicated that they expect that their membership will increase and that they are making plans to hold various activities that will enable the library to maintain its position as the premiere facility in the County. He stated that they are also looking forward to a positive relationship with the Trustees, Friends of the Library, and Council. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): • Council Member Thomson stated that District 7 has a problem with unregulated intersections, particularly from southbound Marguerite Avenue to old Corona del Mar. He requested that the Traffic Division review the situation. • Council Member Thomson stated that Districts 6 and 7 have issues relative to the preservation of views because of homes and trees. He requested that the City Manager survey other cities to see what solutions are available. • Council Member Thomson reported that the second phase of the Harbor Day School project consists of building only one building. He announced that the plans are in the Planning Department for review. • Council Member Thomson announced that, during today's study session, he asked for a budget amendment to allow for the planting of trees on northbound MacArthur Boulevard up to the Bonita Canyon Sports Park. • Mayor Noyes reported that the City had its groundbreaking ceremony for the Bonita Canyon Sports Park on Monday. He stated that it will be the largest park in the City (33 acres), be completed in about a year, and cost about $6.5 million. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 23, 2000. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. 2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by title only. INDEX • RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF ENHANCED RETIREMENT AND Res 2000 -46/C -2059 CAFETERIA PLAN BENEFITS FOR MISCELLANEOUS Res 2000 -47/C -2065 Volume 53 - Page 402 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX • EMPLOYEES AND MARINE SAFETY OFFICERS. Adopt the following Res 2000 -48 /C -2051 resolutions: 1) Resolution No. 2000 -46 only with respect to members of the Res 2000 -49 Newport Beach City Employees Association, fixing the employer's Res 2000 -50 /C -2058 contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; Res 2000 -51 2) Resolution No. 2000 -47 only with respect to members of the Newport Res 2000 -52/C -563 Beach Employees League, fixing the employer's contribution under the Enhanced Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; 3) Resolution No. 2000 -48 Retirement and only with respect to members of the Newport Professional and Technical Cafeteria Plan Employees Association, fixing the employer's contribution under the Public Benefits Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; 4) Resolution No. 2000 -49 only (38/66) with respect to members of the Newport Beach Key and Management Employees, fixing the employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; 5) Resolution No. 2000 -50 only with respect to members of the Newport Beach Marine Safety Officers, fixing the employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; 6) Resolution No. 2000 -51 only with respect to members of the Newport Beach City Council, fixing the employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act; 7) Resolution No. 2000 -52 declaring its intention to approve an amendment to contract between the Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council, City of Newport Beach. 4. Removed at the request of an audience member. • ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 5. PARKING METER RATE INCREASES. Adopt Ordinance No. 2000 -9 Ord 2000 -9 /Parking establishing parking meter fees for on- street meters. Meter Rate (85) 6. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 1.12 OF THE NBMC (contd. from Ord 2000 -10 5/9/00). Adopt Ordinance No. 2000 -10 amending Section 1.12.020 of Title 1 Citations and of the NBMC pertaining to citations and warrants. Warrants (70) 7. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 1.30 OF THE NBMC. Adopt Ordinance Ord 2000 -11 No. 2000 -11 amending Section 1.30.030 of Title 1 of the NBMC pertaining to Election Campaign election campaign filing. Filing (39) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 8. ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE WITH KELSHO COMMUNICATIONS. C -3164 Approve the assignment of the Citicasters lease to Entravision Radio Tower Communications Corporation and approve and authorize the City Manager and Station to execute the Memorandum of Lease Assignment and Estoppel Certificate. (38) 9. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH THE C -2058 NEWPORT BEACH MARINE SAFETY OFFICERS ASSOCIATION. Marine Safety Approve MOU. Officers MOU (38) 10. LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE AND C -3346 THE METRO CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY TO OPERATE RADIO Radio EQUIPMENT ON SIERRA PEAK. Authorize the City Manager, the City • Equipment/ of Newport Beach representative to the Metro Cities Fire Authority Sierra Peak ( "Authority ") Board to approve the renewal of this License Agreement and (38) Volume 53 - Page 403 Volume 53 - Page 404 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX • future License Agreements between the County of Orange and the Authority for communications equipment at Sierra Peak Communications Facility. 11. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - EMERGENCY RESCUE C -3347 VEHICLE. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Emergency Cities of Costa Mesa and Irvine in order to formalize the cost sharing Rescue agreement and liability exposure for an Emergency Rescue Vehicle Vehicle accessible to all three jurisdictions. (38) 12. AWARD OF CONTRACT (C -3336) FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW C -3336 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT SAN MIGUEL DRIVE /PORT RAMSEY BA -067 PLACE, SAN MIGUEL DRIVE/ PORT SUTTON DRIVE -YACHT New Traffic COQUETTE, AND AVOCADO AVENUE /FARALLON DRIVE ALONG Signals/ WITH MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS AT VARIOUS Miscellaneous LOCATIONS. 1) Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award C -3336 to Improvements Macadee Electrical Construction for the total bid price of $658,234 and (38/40) authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; 2) establish an amount of $65,800 to cover the cost of unforeseen work; 3) accept the contribution of $34,467 from the Broadmoor Seaview Homeowners Association; 4) establish an amount of $9,000 to cover the cost of Edison installing transformers for electrical service; and 5) approve a budget amendment (BA -067) for $336,240.14 from the Transportation and Circulation Fund balance to Account No. 7261- C5200068. • 13. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND HOSPITAL C -3348 BA -068 ROAD. 1) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Professional Newport Blvd. & Services Agreement with W.G. Zimmerman Engineering in the amount of Hospital Rd. $67,100 to complete plans, specifications and estimates for improvements at Improvements the intersection of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road; and 2) approve a (38/40) budget amendment (BA -068) in the amount of $51,715.48 transferring funds from the Transportation and Circulation Fund balance to Account No. 7261- 5100070. 14. BALBOA PENINSULA GATEWAY PARK, LIDO GATEWAY PARK C -3155 AND SOUND WALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS (C -3155) - Balboa Peninsula COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the Gateway Park/ City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; 3) authorize the City Clerk to Lido Gateway release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion Park/Sound has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; Wall Landscape and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond six months after Council Improvements acceptance. (38) 15. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR BIG CANYON C -3349 RESERVOIR SEISMIC ANALYSIS PROGRAM. Authorize the Mayor Big Canyon and the City Clerk to execute a Professional Services Agreement with URS Reservoir Greiner Woodward Clyde International Americas, Inc. in the amount of Seismic $124,674 to complete a Seismic Analysis Program (SAP) for the City's Big Analysis Canyon Reservoir facility. Program (38) • 16. JAMBOREE ROAD/EASTBLUFF DRIVE INTERSECTION C- 3202 -B IMPROVEMENTS (C- 3202 -B) - COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. Jamboree Road/ 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; Eastbluff Drive Volume 53 - Page 404 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • 3) authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond six months after Council acceptance. 17. FINANCIAL AUDIT AND SINGLE AUDIT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2000, 2001 AND 2002. Approve the selection of the auditing firm of Conrad and Associates, L.L.P. and enter into a contract with said firm to audit the City's financial statements and perform a Single Audit of the City's Federal assistance for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2000, 2001, and 2002. The total all- inclusive maximum fees for each year, including any out -of- pocket expenses and a three percent fee adjustment for each of the two succeeding years are $38,465, $39,620 and $40,810 respectively. Upon satisfactory completion of the work performed during each of the first three years, the City Council may extend the auditing services agreement up to an additional three years without obtaining written proposals. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 18. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR JUNE 8, 2000. Receive and file. 19. Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway. • 20. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -065) IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,760 TO APPROPRIATE THE PROCEEDS OF THE INCOME FROM THE ACKERMAN PROPERTY TO ACQUIRE HIGH TECH LIBRARY EQUIPMENT PER THE ACKERMAN TRUST. Approve BA -065. 21. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -066) IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 TO INCREASE REVENUE ESTIMATES TO REFLECT FUNDS FROM THE BROKAW FAMILY FOUNDATION AND TO INCREASE EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS. Approve BA -066. 22. MEASURE M ELIGIBILITY REQUALIFICATION FOR FY 1999 -2000. 1) Adopt the Seven -Year Capital Improvement Program; and 2) direct staff to submit the adopted Capital Improvement Program, and the Maintenance of Effort certification to the Orange County Transportation Authority to satisfy the eligibility provisions for the Measure M and the Congestion Management Programs. 23. REPORT ON LAWS PROHIBITING THE USE OF DEVICES THAT PRE -EMPT TRAFFIC SIGNALS. Receive and file. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (4 and 19). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: • Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Volume 53 - Page 405 INDEX Intersection Improvements (38) C -3350 Financial Audit and Single Audit Services (38) Planning (68) BA -065 Library Equipment (40/50) BA -066 Library Donation (40/50) Measure M/ Orange County Transportation Authority (74) Traffic Signals (85) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 4. FY 2000 -2001 COMBINED TRANSPORTATION FUNDING PROGRAM APPLICATION. Public Works Director Webb stated that the City has an opportunity to apply for funds through the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Combined Transportation Funding Program once a year. He reported that the funds will allow the City to be placed on a waiting list to receive contributions from the various funding sources that OCTA manages. He indicated that the City is applying for the Irvine Avenue Widening Project from University Drive to Bristol Street; Superior Avenue Widening Project adjacent to the mobile home park; Placentia Avenue Widening Program from Superior Avenue to Hospital Road; Jamboree Road/Bison Avenue Intersection Improvements; and Jamboree Road Widening Project from MacArthur Boulevard to Bristol Street South. He stated that the City would be competing with other cities for the funding and that the OCTA advisory committee will make a determination between now and mid - September/ October about eligibility. Mayor Pro Tern Adams asked what the Circulation Element indicates as Jamboree Road's maximum width in the Bison area. Mr. Webb stated that the area is considered "major modified" which provides for intersection widening that would be in excess of six lanes. The improvements that would • be anticipated at that location would include additional lanes that may have up to four lanes through the intersection but could also have additional turn lanes. He confirmed that environmental documents would be needed for any project in that area. Council Member Glover expressed concern that there has been constant repairs on Jamboree Road for the past decade and asked when they will be completed. Mr. Webb reviewed the current projects on Jamboree Road and indicated that the road is a major artery for the community since it carries 50,000 to 60,000 cars /utilities a day. He believed that Jamboree Road will be in good shape for years after the proposed projects are completed. Barry Eaton, 727 Bellis Street, stated that he is President of the Eastbluff Homeowners Association and that he is speaking on behalf of the Board. He indicated that they are very concerned that Council is proposing to widen Jamboree Road to eight lanes at Bison, but were relieved that Mr. Webb indicated that the additional right -of -way would come from the other side of Jamboree Road. He stated that he is not sure how happy that would make the homeowners association on the other side of Jamboree Road. He also expressed their concern about the noise problem that would occur if travel lanes are put out to the curbs and about the travel lanes being installed next to the sidewalks with the pedestrians. He emphasized that the project would be out of sequence when Council just acted in the last year to take the cross traffic off of Bison. He stated that they believe there is more of a need at the Jamboree/University intersection where a lot of the traffic peels off in either • direction. He requested that Council delete the Bison/Jamboree project from the funding request until the University intersection is funded. Mr. Eaton stated that they realize that this is just a funding request; however, momentum is strong once County funding is received to conduct the project. Volume 53 - Page 406 INDEX Res 2000 -53 Combined Transportation Funding Program (74) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Mr. Webb stated that, when recommending these types of projects, they rely on the Circulation Element and the General Plan. He reported that, as far back as 1988, Jamboree Road/ Bison Avenue was a location that was noted as needing work for the 2010 timeframe. He stated that changes and modifications may be needed as the City gets into the planning; however, this is just to put a place mark in for the funding. He pointed out that the design work is not even conceived and that the application would not start for two years. He stated that there is plenty of time to look at preliminary planning and reevaluate the projects, and, if necessary, the City can withdraw the application next year. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions regarding the Jamboree /University intersection, Mr. Webb indicated that this would be one of the projects that they anticipate applying for funds in the next fiscal year. He added that substituting the Jamboree /Bison project for the Jamboree /University project is a possibility. Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that he is skeptical of even the mid -term need for this, particularly with regard to the comment about Council's recent changes to the intersection. Mr. Webb confirmed that future volume to capacity analysis was looked at based on the recent changes to the Jamboree /Bison intersection. He stated that the ratio becomes about .8 with the improvement in 2010 and the additional lanes. He indicated that, since applications are being considered at this time, they will probably remove the • project from the list if it is not approved and try to substitute it for another project. Mayor Pro Tem Adams indicated that a Jamboree/University project may also pose a problem with his homeowners association, especially since it was not noticed to the public. Mr. Webb clarified that the procedure for the funding is that the projects are requested and then the sequencing is set -up relative to how the funds are drawn. He emphasized that this is just a placeholder. Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that he is not too concerned with the request since it is just a placeholder and would be coming before Council a number of times if the City receives the funding. He indicated that he is comfortable with requesting funds for the Jamboree /Bison project; however, noted that staff will really need to demonstrate why this is truly necessary and that the impacts can be mitigated. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -53 approving the submittal of the City's FY 2000 -2001 program application to the Orange County Combined Transportation Funding Program; and direct staff to apply for funding under the Orange County Combined Transportation Funding Programs for the various projects as included in the City's application package. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: • None Absent: None Volume 53 - Page 407 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • 19. PROPOSED CULTURAL ARTS CENTER. City Manager Bludau stated that Council may want to consider holding a study session on this issue, but noted that the study sessions are filled until the first study session in August. He indicated that there may be several issues (i.e. open space, affordable housing, and general plan amendments) that may impact the Ad Hoc Committee for the Arts and Education Center's request. Council Member Ridgeway believed that the matter was not properly noticed since it was placed on the Consent Calendar. Further, whatever action is taken, this Council cannot bind future Councils and that this project is probably at risk during the process of gaining momentum and money. Mayor Pro Tom Adams noted that this has been a controversial item in the past and indicated that Council is not ready to make the type of commitment requested by the Ad Hoc Committee and questioned whether a study session is the appropriate venue since Council cannot take action during study sessions. He stated that the Ad Hoc Committee would like to proceed with their fundraising and get some type of decision. Council Member Glover expressed the opinion that, under the Brown Act, this issue has been properly noticed since the public is allowed to speak on any agendized item. City Attorney Burnham stated that the item was is properly placed on the agenda, the public can comment on the item, and it can be discussed. However, he noted that the City Manager indicated that his recommendation was not properly listed on the agenda. Council Member Ridgeway noted that there is a need for debate and discussion on this item and agreed that this item should be placed on a regular agenda rather than on a study session. He indicated that, since this was placed on the Consent Calendar, some people felt they were not adequately noticed. Mr. Bludau indicated that he put this item on the Consent Calendar so it did not get caught up in the later discussions tonight, but concurred that it was an unusual place for the item. Don Gregory, 601 Lido Park Drive, City Arts Commissioner and Co- Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for the Arts and Education Center, stated that he feels like he is drowning in a sea of procedural red tape. He expressed the opinion that the request is a very simple request. He stated that they have been discussing an Arts and Education Center for two years and indicated that they have been to study sessions, had members of the Council talk with them, and that there are very few members of the public and Council who do not know what this is about. He stated that this is a joint venture of the Board of Library Trustees and the City Arts Commission. He noted that they were chosen to advise Council as to artistic considerations in the community and stated that they are strongly advising that the City give the children a chance to learn about art and to do art. He pointed out that they are not asking for anything else at the moment since they still have to conduct feasibility, geological, and traffic studies. • Mr. Gregory emphasized that Council must let them begin and stop continuously tabling the issue. He stated that this is not fair to anyone, especially to Council who appointed the Arts' Commissioners to get things done. He indicated that the City needs to find room for the overflowing Volume 53 - Page 408 INDEX Cultural Arts Center (62) • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX centers of learning since the Corona del Mar High School, Orange County Museum of Arts, and the library are out of space, noting that people had to be turned away from the Distinguished Lecture Series because of the lack of space. Mr. Gregory emphasized the need for the Arts and Education Center and believed that the City has nothing at this time that spells culture. He asked that Council not keep this from going on without an end and relegate them to another study session in which no decisions can be made. He requested that Council allow them to take the next step, noting that they have a revitalized Library Foundation and they are having a fundraiser in August. He reiterated that they will never ask for any funding from the City and that they are just requesting that they let them abut the library as the center of culture. He added that the Center would also help the library with its parking problem and would not block any views. He believed that the only disenchantment that some people have with the project is the site, not the idea. Noting that he does not think that asking for a two year reservation of a portion of the site is unreasonable, Mayor Pro Tom Adams stated that a reservation does not mean a lot since the Ad Hoc Committee still needs to go through an environmental entitlement. He indicated that he is reluctant to vote on this tonight but is supportive of bringing it back at the next meeting. Council Member Thomson stated that everyone agrees that the City needs more culture and arts, but where it should be is something that needs to be • decided. He believed that the momentum will be forthcoming when they start raising money for the Center. He indicated that, once funds are raised, they can then come before Council to discuss the site. He stated that he could support a Center at that location if it is low enough. He noted that there is environmentally sensitive dirt on the site which may intrude on the desired area. Mr. Gregory stated that the first question people will ask if they are donating funds for the Center is about the location. He added that you cannot tell people you are trying to get a site but rather that the City has blessed that site. He clarified that the first step in raising funds is to conduct a feasibility study; however, they cannot raise millions of dollars for a site they do not have. He indicated that the City can even say that they will reserve the land for the Center subject to 900 conditions without giving anything away. Council Member Thomson stated that it would be beneficial to conduct a study session so that everyone can see what the Ad Hoc Committee is thinking and how much of the property the Center would need. Mr. Gregory noted that the Ad Hoc Committee did just that a few months ago. Mr. Burnham stated that the Ad Hoc Committee has asked for three things, of which, he believed that two of them do not require any environmental documentation. Regarding the request to have Council reserve the property for a specific use, he reported that a reservation of property for a specific use might be considered a project under CEQA. He believed that Council can withhold consideration of any other use on the pending submittal of a study and give the Ad Hoc Committee whatever time is necessary to report back to • Council. Mayor Pro Tem Adams indicated to Mr. Gregory that Council would not be able to say that they gave their "blessing" to a site, but the Ad Hoc Volume 53 - Page 409 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Committee can tell perspective donors that Council indicated that nothing else is going to be built on the site for a certain period. Mr. Gregory stated that he thinks he can move forward with saying that nothing else will be built on that land until certain facts are known. Debra Allen, 1021 White Sales, stated that she is not in favor of the Ad Hoc Committee's request, but is neither in favor nor opposed to the project. She reported that her community association had two presentations by the Ad Hoc Committee and were asked if they would like a representative attend their meetings; however, they have never received any notice by the Ad Hoc Committee of any meetings other than the two they attended. She stated that, if she was on the Ad Hoc Committee, it would strike her as odd that the neighborhood across the street that sent a lot of people to the first two meetings never sent anyone to any other meetings. Ms. Allen pointed out that the site is zoned open space and, in order to change it, would need changes to the entitlements, a General Plan Amendment, a use permit, a parcel map, a traffic study, amendment of the CIOSA agreement between The Irvine Company and the City, and offer of dedication by The Irvine Company to the City. She stated that the Center would be a major change to a piece of property that is very sensitive. She suggested that, if anything is going to happen on the property, the City turn it over to a body that conducts regular public hearings to receive input, like the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation (PB &R) Commission, Board of Library Trustees, or Planning Commission. Ms. Allen noted that the Ad Hoc Committee has no plans, • except for vague renderings, to assure that there will be no view impacts or night light impacts. She requested that Council take this issue to the appropriate Commission for review prior to Council taking action. Mayor Pro Tom Adams clarified that Council is just talking about making a commitment not to commit any other land use on that portion of the site for two years. He added that the two years will also give everyone a chance to participate in the process and allow the Ad Hoc Committee to do some fundraising. He indicated that one of the things that was intriguing to him was that it was a grassroots project that does not involve using taxpayer funds. Ms. Allen expressed concern that Council is putting this type of authority in the wrong place. She believed that the Ad Hoc Committee makes representations that they will invite people into the process, but they do not do it and conduct a closed door process that does not involve the people most closely impacted by the project. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that Council has not given the Ad Hoc Committee any power but that it is just a citizens group that is trying to do something good for the City. Council is just trying to give them a window to operate. He reiterated the huge entitlement process they will also need to go though. Pat Beek, Chairperson of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, stated that the land is currently designated open space and that, routinely, the procedure would be to have the PB &R Commission open space committee conduct several public hearings to gather community input. After that, the Committee would submit their findings and recommendations via • the PB &R Commission to Council. She indicated that, at that point, the possibility of an ad hoc committee would come before Council. She believed that any action tonight should be premature. Additionally, she believed that Council is allowing a handful of people to circumvent the system and urged Volume 53 - Page 410 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Council to follow the procedure. She believed that, after hearing Mr. Gregory's statements, the open space committee hearings would be the perfect venue for him to gather community support. She noted that Council does not want to sanction every ad hoc committee proposal that raises money. Jan Vandersloot, 2221 East 16th Street, member of the Steering Committee of Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON), stated that SPON unanimously voted on May 16 to go through the process to create a passive open space park on the site and that they will be presenting an agenda item to the PB &R Commission to create and develop a passive open space park. He indicated that the Library Exchange Agreement of 1991 designated the site as recreation and environmental open space and the CIOSA agreement of 1992 dedicated the site to the City as open space. He believed that the logical next step is to create a park on the site. He expressed concern that, if Council reserves a portion of the site for an Arts and Education Center, not only is Council breaking faith with the dedication for open space but Council is also preventing an effort to create a park on the site. He stated that SPON met with Mr. Gregory and would appreciate a Center in the City, but it is just a matter of where it should be located. He suggests that the Ad Hoc Committee look for funds for a Center that may be located in another site in the City. Dr. Vandersloot noted that he only found out about this item by looking at the agenda on the internet and believed that no one from SPON was notified of tonight's meeting. He suggested that Council follow • Ms. Allen's request and not take any action tonight. He believed that Council is giving away 3.5 acres for the next two years and doing a de facto General Plan Amendment by reserving it for a building. Val Skoro, 1601 Bayadere Terrace, expressed concern that due process was not followed since most people did not find out about this until they noticed it was on the Consent Calendar the other night. He stated that he supports Ms. Allen's recommendation to follow due process and table the issue so that open public hearings are conducted before arriving at any kind of decision. He indicated that this is premature, noting that the Corona del Mar Residents Association will be receiving a presentation by Planning Director Temple this Thursday regarding the land. Bob Caustin, Defend the Bay, 471 Old Newport Boulevard, stated that he is not speaking on behalf of Defend the Bay because he did not have time to poll the Board on this and requested time to do so. He indicated that the land was given to the City by The Irvine Company in exchange for development rights. He believed that the City is now talking about piecemeal decisions on the property. He stated that there needs to be a complete, long term plan that hopefully contains open space. He indicated that he is not saying that the Ad Hoc Committee's idea is wrong, but that he has more questions. He asked about the possibility of holding the site for permanent open space with parking so that people can enjoy the open space that was paid for by increased density. He agreed that this should be discussed during a study session. He expressed the opinion that low cost • housing should not be placed on this site since it would create intensity on top of open space. Mr. Caustin believed that funds can be obtained at this time, but it is improper to move forward on a plan in which they do not have a title or right. Further, he expressed the opinion that it would be Volume 53 - Page 411 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • inappropriate to approve the plan in concept prior to knowing all the plans. Mayor Noyes clarified that the site is actually 12 acres, but the Ad Hoc Committee is discussing 3.5 acres of the site. He reported that the same issue was before Council 1.5 years ago and Council did not do anything at that time because it was the feeling that they wanted to leave that site open as long as possible. He noted that there are three groups that want to use the site: environmentalists that want open space, people who want an Arts and Education Center, and those that want senior housing. Mr. Caustin expressed the opinion that a joint use for a cultural and open space area with the commitment to each other may be possible later if there are some restrictions and requirements so they can both coexist. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he likes Mr. Caustin's idea to tie the site to permanent open space and provide parking for open space. He reiterated that Council is not talking about approving the plan in concept, but Council is talking about agreeing on not doing anything with a portion of the site for two years. He expressed the opinion that they are actually talking about creating a de facto open space for two years. In response to Mr. Caustin's comments, Mr. Burnham clarified that the property was not acquired because of some increase in entitlement granted to The Irvine Company. The CIOSA agreement allowed The Irvine • Company to develop only in accordance with the then current General Plan and the dedications of land were in excess of those that would have been required under law at that time. Kathy Harrison, 1621 Lincoln, Chairperson of the City Arts Commission, stated that all of the Ad Hoc Committee meetings, which were joint meetings of the City Arts Commission and Board of Library Trustees, were duly posted at City Hall. She emphasized that everyone is welcome to come to the meetings, they want to talk to them, and do not want to start out argumentative in any way. Mayor Noyes stated that, when there is a controversial issue, the Ad Hoc Committee needs to make a list and either mail or call the individuals to tell them about the next meeting. Lucille Kuehn, 1831 Seadrift Drive, stated that her concern is to preserve the Newport Beach Public Library's continuing excellence. Referencing City Charter Section 708, she noted that, "the Board of Library Trustees... shall have the power and duty to have charge of the administration of City libraries and make and enforce such by -laws, rules and regulations as may be necessary therefor." She stated that there is nothing in the Charter that references anything that resembles a cultural arts center, yet the Trustees have agendized the study of this subject for a long period of time. She believed that this is a violation of the Charter and that the Ad Hoc Committee has a history of circumventing procedures and channels. She asked if a needs study has been conducted and indicated that she is opposed to a feasibility study. She reported that volunteers, along with library staff, • conducted a needs study at no cost to the City a number of years ago while studying the proposal for the main library on Avocado Drive. She indicated that the area has the Orange County Museum of Art and that, as a member of the Museum, she is unaware of a shortage of space for children's Volume 53 - Page 412 INDEX J City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX educational and artistic opportunities. She indicated that a large auditorium is needed but not a new building, and noted that the Friends of the Library room is inadequate because of the setbacks set at that time. However, she reported that the setbacks have changed for the benefit of the development of the Corona del Mar Plaza. With the change, she believed that the room size can easily be doubled and better acoustics, audio /visual capabilities, air conditioning, and more seating can be provided. She stated that the issue arose because of the shortage of seating for the popular Distinguished Speakers Series. At the same time, she stated that the open space adjacent to the library can be preserved, noting that it has one of the most magnificent views and serves as one of the major gateways to the City. Ms. Kuehn requested that Council let this exquisite site remain as a limited public park, adding that it will add to the beauty and acclaim of Newport Center. She asked that Council not be pressured by a small self- serving group into unnecessary expense for the City in developing an unused cultural arts center. Mayor Pro Tern Adams clarified that the City will not be paying for any of the studies and that it is his understanding that the Ad Hoc Committee is proposing to conduct their own studies. Council Member Ridgeway added that the Friends of the Library room can be expanded but there will still be inadequate parking at the library. Roberta Jorgensen, 124 Coral, City Arts Commissioner and member on the • Ad Hoc Committee, reiterated that all the Ad Hoc Committee is asking for is some momentum so they could proceed with a feasibility study that will be completely privately funded through the Arts Foundation. She reported that they already presented a needs assessment to the City at a study session and that the feasibility study will look deeper into the needs (i.e. who will be the potential users of the facility, the cost of the building, how big should the building be, what programs need to be included, what is the income potential, and what is the fundraising potential). She indicated that they will be giving Council progress reports. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, agreed that it is time for a jump start on the approved /designated use of the site which is to turn it into a park. He also believed that the PB &R Commission should be charged with trying to get a design for the park. Elaine Linhof£, 1760 E. Ocean Boulevard, stated that she agrees with Ms. Allen, Dr. Vandersloot, Ms. Beek, and Mr. Beek. She believed that, even if the space is reserved, it creates a perception that Council has plans to eventually approve the project and indicated that she is opposed to that. David Carlson, 601 Lido Park Drive, believed that the speakers before him learned the ultimate persuasive technique of using terms like "due process" and "lack of information." He indicated that the request is a simple idea that only asks for an acknowledgment that the Ad Hoc Committee has a window of opportunity to raise funds. He stated that he is strongly in favor of the • request, hopes that Council does not defer the issue, and requests that Council take action. Mr. Carlson stated that he has raised funds before and that he personally would not pay serious attention to anything that did not have a site associated with it and that a pledge cannot be banked unless Volume 53 - Page 413 • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX there was something substantive around it relative to a Mr. Burnham expressed concern that representation will be made that the site has been committed if members of Charter committees are raising money for a project, even though that is not the intent of Council's actions tonight. Further, the step that is being requested is bigger than the one he believed Council was being asked to take tonight. He stated that the Planning Director indicated to the Ad Hoc Committee that there are a lot of things that need to be done before Council can evaluate what the project is and what its impacts will be. None of those steps have been taken yet. He indicated that he would like to look at some of the legal issues involved. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to allow the City Attorney two weeks to review the requests and make a determination; and provide staff the opportunity to talk with the Ad Hoc Committee for the Arts and Education Center to map out a process. Council Member Debay reported that she attended several meetings at the library with the Ad Hoc Committee and that they have spent a lot of time and hard work on this and are not self - seeking. Council Member Thomson stated that he could support the motion if it was amended to have the Ad Hoc Committee present the project to the PB &R Commission. Mr. Burnham indicated that he would also like to look at who • would be the appropriate body to represent the City at this stage of the proceedings. Mayor Pro Tem Adams reiterated that it is an excellent idea to combine the Center with permanent open space and provide parking for a passive open space park. Council Member Glover stated that the City Arts Commission hired a consultant two years ago to determine what they should focus on and that she said she would like them to concentrate on the youth in the community. She noted that there are two high schools in the community and believed that the group can assist the schools by possibly adding a wing to them that will address art and culture. She added that she regrets that the Council she sat on made MacArthur too low so that you cannot get the ocean view that you once did. She expressed the opinion that the site should be open space and that not every space needs something built on it. Council Member Ridgeway stated that it would be an injustice to send this issue anywhere else but before Council since they set policies. He indicated that there is a conflict about this parcel even though we are all for the better good of the City and for arts and culture, noting that the City does not have a central performing arts center for the children. He expressed the opinion that the Center is a wonderful idea and he supports it, and added that he does not want to lose Mr. Gregory's enthusiasm. • Council Member O'Neil stated that it is probably a good idea to take some time to try to come up with a project that accommodates a lot of different uses. He indicated that he basically supports arts and culture in the City; however, the property is looked at differently by the different groups in the Volume 53 - Page 414 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • City. He pointed out that there is a small chance that anything will be placed on the property and that there is no rush. He stated that he would like to see the momentum and enthusiasm continue but there may be some other areas where this use may be more appropriate. He asked if there is a majority on Council that is willing to set aside this property for two years and allow the project if they raise the funds and assemble a plan. He stated that Council may not be able to do that legally and agreed that the decision should he with Council. Mayor Pro Tem Adams reiterated his motion and agreed with Council Member O'Neil that a decision will probably not take place in two weeks. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: Glover Abstain: None Absent: None Noting a Council policy, Mayor Noyes announced that the meeting will not go beyond midnight. He further announced that a 15 minute recess will take place at 9:45 p.m. Regarding the Newport Dunes public hearing, Mayor Noyes assured the audience • that Council will not be voting on the project tonight. Further, the order for the evening will be that staff will provide a report, Planning Commission Chairman Ed Selich will provide a report on the process they went through, the applicant will provide a presentation, the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee will provide a presentation, and then the group of homeowners around the Dunes will provide a presentation. He indicated that he is unsure if individual public comments will be taken tonight due to the time constraint but noted that this will be before Council at the June 27 Council meeting. Mayor Noyes added that Agenda Item No. 29 will be considered prior to the public hearings so that Council can confirm Board and Commission nominations. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Schoonmaker, 19 Canyon Island Drive, stated that he ran against Mayor Noyes during the last election and that there were articles in the newspaper regarding Mayor Noyes' background that he found disturbing. He added that he did not care for the way the matter was addressed and expressed the opinion that Mayor Noyes did not do the right thing and that he should resign from his position as Mayor. Mr. Schoonmaker stated that, when people run for City Council, as he will be doing in November, they should have an open background. In fact, he recommends that the City or the newspapers submit Council candidates to an FBI background check. • Bob Caustin, 471 Old Newport Boulevard, Defend the Bay, thanked City • staff for a congenial working relationship. He reported that Deputy City Manager Kiff was appointed to a State water resource control board along with himself in Sacramento. He stated that Defend the Bay is fortunate in having broad based support and are in the process of hiring two full time Volume 53 - Page 415 INDEX Volume 53 - Page 416 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX • attorneys to represent Defend the Bay and the bay. Council Member Debay stated that everyone admires Defend the Bay's work. Noting that Defend the Bay is a non - profit organization, she asked if their audits have been published for viewing. Mr. Caustin confirmed that their tax statements are open for review and filed with the government. Council Member Debay requested that Mr. Caustin bring her a copy to City Hall. CURRENT BUSINESS 29. BOARD AND COMMISSION SCHEDULED VACANCIES - Board and CONFIRMATION OF NOMINEES. Commission Scheduled Motion by Council Member Thomson to confirm the following Vacancies nominations; appointments to be made on June 27, 2000: (24) Board of Library Trustees (1 Vacancy - Jim Wood) [ 2 nominees] William Adams and Walter Howald City Arts Commission (2 Vacancies - Arlene Cartozian and Lyn Belasco) [ 4 nominees] Lyn Belasco, Arlene Cartozian, Patricia Stark, and Catherine Turco • Civil Service Board (2 Vacancies - Dayna Pettit and Clint Hoose, Jr.) [4 nominees - Police and Fire Association Nominees] (Note: City Charter requires 5 nominees, however there are only 4 applicants) Timothy Brown, Paula Godfrey, Sidney Stokes and Douglas Wood Planning Commission (1 Vacancy - Thomas Ashley) [2 nominees] Shant Agajanian and Jeffrey Cole Mayor Pro Tem Adams clarified that the Appointments Committee did not participate in the nominations for the Civil Service Board. Those nominees were selected by the Fire and Police Employees Associations. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None PUBLIC HEARINGS 24. FISCAL YEAR 2000 -01 PROPOSED BUDGET HEARING. FY 2000 -2001 Budget • City Manager Bludau reported that Council had its third study session today (40) in which they reviewed the proposed fiscal year 2000 -2001 budget and the capital improvement projects. He stated that the revenue and expenditure Volume 53 - Page 416 Volume 53 - Page 417 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX • summaries are included in the staff report and copies of the proposed budget are available for review in the City Clerk's office, main library, and branch libraries. Mr. Bludau indicated that the public hearing is for the public to comment and make any suggests or recommendations as to what should be included or deleted in the budget. He reported that the budget will be before Council for adoption at the June 27 Council meeting. Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Mr. Bludau indicated that no motion was necessary. 25. ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMIT. Res 2000 -54 Appropriation Administrative Services Director Danner reported that the City is required Limit by the State Constitution each year to adopt an Appropriation (Gann) Limit (40) (proceeds of taxes) that the City cannot exceed. He stated that the limit is computed annually and is checked and certified by the auditors to the State Controller. He reported that the amount that the budget is under the Gann Limit is $23,470,251. • Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Debay to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -54 determining and establishing an appropriations limit ($83,745,471) for Fiscal Year 2000 -01 in accordance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution and Government Code Section 7910. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Motion by Council Member O'Neil to consolidate the consideration of Agenda Item Nos. 26 and 27. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None • 26. VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF PORTIONS OF UNUSED Res 2000 -55 RIGHT -OF -WAY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OF PACIFIC Vacation and DRIVE IN CORONA DEL MAR. Abandonment/ Volume 53 - Page 417 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • 27. AMENDMENT TO FRONT YARD SETBACKS ON PACIFIC DRIVE (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT 899) - AMEND DISTRICTING MAP NO. 16 TO ESTABLISH A LOT -BY -LOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR 13 PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OF PACIFIC DRIVE BETWEEN AVOCADO AVENUE AND THE WESTERLY SIDE OF BEGONIA AVENUE DUE TO THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- WAY, AMEND SECTION 20.10.030 AND SECTION 20.10.040 OF THE ZONING CODE TO ADD CLARIFYING LANGUAGE FOR DETERMINING THE CALCULATION OF BUILDABLE AREA FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES. City Manager Bludau reported that there are two different actions required of Council. One is the action on the vacation and abandonment of portions of Pacific Drive in Corona del Mar from the Public Works Department and the second is an amendment to front yard setbacks on Pacific Drive from the Planning Department. Public Works Director Webb reported that the department received a request to consider the vacation of a portion of Pack Drive. He indicated that construction of the original Corona del Mar tract started about 1926, but the tract map dates back to the turn of the century. He stated that Pacific Drive is generally 80 feet wide of right -of -way, is offset, and is not constructed along the center line of Pacific Drive. He noted that the request for vacation • would be on the bay side of Pacific Drive and would vacate those portions of the right -of -way in excess of 60 feet, measured perpendicular to the center line. Additionally, the portion between Acacia and Avocado Avenues would be vacated about 19 feet, and the portion between Acacia and Begonia Avenues would be vacated about 12 feet. He reported that the right -of -way is currently being used for patios, driveways, planters, and various other uses that belong to the adjoining residences. Noting that the surveyors have not conducted a formal boundary survey, he indicated that there may be some very minor building encroachments into the right -of -way. Mr. Webb also reported that it appears that some of the older buildings were built with a zero setback and may come into the right -of -way by an inch or two. He indicated that, if the portion was vacated, the new right -of -way line would be three or four feet behind the existing sidewalk which gives a little bit of a landscaped area that would be between the property line and the sidewalk area. Mr. Webb reported that, in order for Council to vacate this area, they must make a finding that there is no present or future public use for the property and there is no need for the property that is being vacated to be used for non - motorized transportation (bike trails). He stated that the department is neutral on the issue, but indicated that the area to be vacated is not currently used by the general public. Mr. Webb confirmed for Council Member Debay that, if vacated, the street, curb, and sidewalks would remain where they are currently located and no • changes will take place. Assistant City Manager Wood reported that the recommended change in the zoning in Agenda Item No. 27 is to maintain the structures' setback line in Volume 53 - Page 418 INDEX Pacific Drive Ord 2000 -12 PCA 899 Front Yard Setback/ Pacific Drive (90/94) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • the same physical location as it is today (5 feet from the existing property line). Further, a different setback needs to be specified for each lot because of the angle of the street (this is found in the exhibit to the proposed ordinance). She stated that the result of the change would be that there will not be structures any closer to Pacific Drive than there are today and no further impacts from high buildings in that area. Ms. Wood did point out that the zoning proposal does include the ability to calculate the vacated area into the buildable area of the lot. This would afford the property owners the ability to have more floor area in their dwellings, but they would still need to maintain all other setbacks and height requirements of the zone. Council Member Debay asked if the City was liable for anything that happened on the property if it maintained ownership. City Attorney Burnham stated that the City is not liable unless there is a dangerous condition on the City property. He indicated that he is not aware of any condition in that area that would be considered dangerous. Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. Bill Edwards stated that he is an architect. He reported that the right -of- way was originally slated to be the electric rail line about a century ago but the railway concept was abandoned. The right -of -way remained the same and was overlooked. He discussed how the lots were laid and past vacations on Pacific Drive. He noted that there were no approvals required until • recently for these encroachments and, in time, the property owners assumed it belonged to them. Mr. Edwards reported that he has been working with the Bettingens for the past two years in designing their improvements. He stated that they discovered early on in the process that the height limits changed which made the properties on the bay side of the street non - conforming, preexisting structures. The Bettingens needed an expansion since the home only had two bedrooms and their daughter and son were getting older. He stated that they could have expanded upward in the home but chose a modest outward expansion of the three levels down the slope. He also reported that it was discovered that all the south side homeowners do not own their front yards and driveways due to the abandoned rail line. He stated that they were told that the City abandoned excess rights -of -ways all over the City but that this one was overlooked but is a good candidate since it was wide and the street and parkways are in the right location. He indicated that the Bettingens, along with other residents, requested a greater abandonment and a community meeting was held to inform people along Pacific Drive. He pointed out that the front setback lines are to remain in its current condition and reported that the abandonment will allow a portion of the small amount of additional buildable area to each of the 13 southerly properties to be more like the other properties in the area, but still less than the lots of equal width across the street. He indicated that, with the approval of the abandonment, the additional square footage for the Bettingen residence will be placed down the slope which does not affect anyone. He stated that many • of the residents are concerned about the height issues and emphasized that there is no change to the allowable buildable envelope. Further, the view impact will be minimal and negligible, if anything at all. Volume 53 - Page 419 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated to Mr. Edwards that he finds it hard to believe that the utility company had to tell them where the property lines were located, especially since drawings had already been made. Mr. Edwards indicated that the property lines, as they existed, were five feet outside the front door. In response to Mayor Noyes' question, Associate Planner Garcia reported that the 1.5 floor area limit starts at Avocado Avenue and goes through Corona del Mar. Council Member Glover asked what the floor area ratio (FAR) would be if the area was abandoned. Ms. Wood clarified that the FAR will not change but the buildable area that the ratio can be applied to will increase and varies lot by lot. Ms. Garcia explained the exhibit attached to the supplemental report that depicts the additional buildable area and additional square footage. The FAR ranges from 200 to 700 square feet, depending on lot size. Randy Lush, 2223 Pacific Drive, stated that he bought his house in September 1999 and that the gentleman he purchased his house from did not disclose to him that his front yard, just a few feet from the front door, was City property and that it was not called out on his preliminary title report. He added that he believes that there has to be some liability involved, stating that he has tripped in his front yard before. • Mr. Lush stated that he spoke to Managing Appraiser Ted Willoughby of the County Assessor's Office last Friday who indicated that the County has no intentions of reassessing the properties if the abandonment is approved. He indicated that all the information he received indicates that the proposed changes would not allow anything to change above what is there at this time, except that a few hundred more square feet is gained. Jack Pautsch, 2204 Waterfront Drive, stated that he owns property on Pacific Drive. He utilized a diagram to show what the property lines would become if the vacation and abandonment was approved and emphasized that the character of the neighborhood does not change. Bill Cote, 3748 E. Coast Highway, stated that he has been a real estate broker in the City for 31 years. He expressed his support of the vacation and abandonment and the front yard setback amendment. He believed that this does not affect any of the homeowners on the north side of Pacific Drive since they can only go from 300 to 700 square feet on the view side toward the bay. He added that it is not unusual for people not to be aware of their property lines, especially in cases of abandonments. Chriss Street stated that he is representing his father -in -law, Matt Cox, who resides at 2235 Pacific Drive. He reported that Mr. Cox built the house in 1929 when Pacific Drive was the Pacific Electric Car right -of -way. He indicated that it was Mr. Cox's understanding that, since there were many of these right -of -ways that were abandoned during the 1960's and they were • not going to become a light rail, the right -of ways were all turned back to the homeowners. He stated that some of the people on the street got educated by this process and added that it seemed unusual that the front yards would belong to the City. He indicated that he supports the proposals. Volume 53 - Page 420 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Robert Kendziorski, 2228 Pacific Drive, disagreed with Mr. Cot6 about views not being impacted, believing that his and his neighbor's views would be impacted since the extra buildable square footage could start to take away the bay view of his second story. He believed that the rules are now changing after people have paid premium for these views. He reported that preliminary title reports do not state anything about property lines since they are not surveys but just contains a chain of ownership. He indicated that the City can give away the land if it wants to, but recommended that Council not make the extra square footage buildable. In response to Mr. Kendziorski's remarks, Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that he makes a good point relative to the views crossing the back of the lot being affected by actions that stem from the proposed recommendations; however, he reiterated that the view can currently be blocked without adopting the actions. He stated that the approval would not change the envelope on the lot. He noted that someone can now reconfigure their house, keeping the square footage the same, and still block the view without asking for any approval from the City or receiving any input from the adjacent property owners. The only difference from before is that they can pick up square footage after the action is approved. Roger Pechuls, 2216 Pacific Drive, indicated that they requested to see story poles so all the residents on Pacific Drive could visualize the project and see what impacts would be placed on the residents. He stated that he does not • object to the Bettingens wanting to improve their property and make a better home for their family, but does object to any possibility of his view being impacted. He stated that he bought his property with the understanding from the City that the height restrictions and square footage on the properties would remain the same. He believed that there are a lot more people against the abandonment than there are approving it. Al Ross stated that he sent correspondence and indicated that he is not sure why everyone is here tonight. He expressed his support and noted that the Public Works Department is in favor of the recommendations, noting that the property does belong to the City. He believed that the problem on Pacific Drive lies with one neighbor who has created nothing but chaos by sending out fliers and putting up signs. He added that he has also had trouble with this neighbor. He reiterated that the taxes will not increase, the views for those on the north side will not be affected, and no one can build out any further than they can right now. He added that this situation also takes liability away from the City, is a benefit to the residents, and does not cost the City anything. He expressed the opinion that Council should not let one dissident neighbor upset the entire neighborhood. Doug Lax, 2224 Pacific Drive, took issue with Mr. Ross' statements and stated that there is more than one dissident neighbor opposed to the proposals. He indicated that he has signatures to verify his statements and utilized a map to show who is opposed to and in favor of the proposals. He expressed the opinion that the problem is that there is a great • misunderstanding by staff and the Planning Commission. He believed that there is a potential impact on views since people can build up their properties due to the new buildable square footage and expressed the opinion that this is not fair for the residents on the north side. He Volume 53 - Page 421 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • referenced the six page correspondence which accused him and the Vaughns of circulating lies, but stated that they circulated the City prepared information and received 600 signatures on the petition. Regarding their efforts to educate people during the Corona del Mar 5K Run, Mr. Lax stated that they did not coerce people to sign the petitions. He strongly urged Council to end this issue tonight by denying the recommendations. Mayor Noyes recessed the meeting at 9:45 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Christi Bettingen, 2215 Pacific Drive, stated that they discovered the oddity on Pacific Drive when they were in the process of doing their remodel and brought this to the attention of the City, but assured that they were not the ones who created the problem since it was in existence for nearly 100 years. Regarding not knowing that the portion of Pacific Drive did not belong to them, she read the title description of the property. She indicated that the situation is problematic for many of them and needs to be dealt with one way or another. She stated that precedence has been set for an abandonment to occur since a couple of homes have already received their abandonment based on the right -of -way. She indicated that Pacific Drive is uniquely beautiful and uniquely laid out, noting that they have 25 to 30 percent less width in terms of the length of the street. She utilized drawings to show that there would be more equity on the street if the proposals were approved. Regarding people thinking that larger homes will now be built, • she pointed out that the larger homes are located on the north side of the street. She stated that her house is 2,300 square feet and that they may get an additional 400 to 500 square feet, although she indicated that she and the majority of the homes on the south side will not come close to the maximum square footage. Ms. Bettingen utilized a video to show that misleading statements were used to acquire signatures on the petitions. Referencing Mr. Lax's graphics, she stated that there were people listed as opposing the project when they were actually in support of the project. Smith Bacon, 2315 Pacific, stated that he does not understand how this problem came about after 75 years. He indicated that he knew exactly where his property was when he conducted his remodel and that they stayed within their bounds no matter how difficult. He expressed concern relative to future variances that may come up and stated that he opposes the vacation and abandonment. Billy Ying Ling, 2308 Pacific Drive, stated that the charm and character of Corona del Mar is unique and is determined by many things like people, architecture, and landscape. He indicated that they chose to become residents of Pacific Drive because of the way it is. He noted that they had a house in Corona del Mar previous and moved when they outgrew it. He stated that they sympathize with the Bettingens but they had the opportunity to purchase the property next to it, but that did not take place. He questioned why this is necessary if there is no impact. He also noted that there is a lot of construction and remodeling now being done within the • existing guidelines on the street and that there are no problems. Regarding no increased taxation, he stated that he doubts Council will grant, in perpetuity, a waiver for any future taxation on the properties. He emphasized that there are many neighbors, including himself, who oppose Volume 53 - Page 422 11011ij • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX this and encouraged Council to vote against this. Mr. Ying Ling indicated for Council Member Ridgeway that his house is about 4,300 square feet. Council Member Ridgeway asked why he was opposed to this if there was going to be no impact to him, noting that no one can build above their current height or beyond the setbacks, and the buildable area is below the cliffs. Mr. Ying Ling believed that the vacation and abandonment would give the ability to grant further variances to change everything. He added that it is not fair to say that someone would tear down their house to build up to the existing guidelines. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that it is unreasonable to think that some of the older houses along Pacific Drive are going to get rebuilt. However, it is not unlikely that they would not be built up if they have not gone up to their entitled height. He indicated that the fear of future variances should not enter into this discussion, but to the extent that it has, he stated that it could be argued that it would probably make people more likely to ask for variances along Pacific Drive if the property is not vacated and to use the unused and undevelopable right -of -way as a reason to request a variance. Steven McNash, 2319 Pacific Drive, stated that he is ecstatic about the abandonment and about the possibility of acquiring a few more feet. Harry Westover, 2301 Pacific Drive, stated that his parents bought 2301 and 2305 Pacific Drive in 1937. He pointed out that he and his sister have lived • with the current condition since then and that Pacific Drive is a wonderfully charming street in part because of the setback. He expressed his fear that the street will lose its charm. He expressed the opinion that future variances are more likely if the owner owns the land than if the City owns the land, and no one can commit to what the secured property taxes will be for future administrations. He stated that he also has concerns about people receiving variances to build closer to the street. Council Member Ridgeway noted that tonight's recommendations are not for a variance. Further, he is not sure how an abandonment gives someone a greater right to ask for a variance since they can currently ask for one now. Harry Wallace, son of Dorothy Westover, 2305 Pacific Drive, stated that his mother is now in support of Agenda Item Nos. 26 and 27 given current information that was given to her. He indicated that he and his sister had no knowledge that the property was not completely owned by their family, but his mother knew. He stated that it is his and his mother's understanding that, as written, the changes will not change the building envelopes of any of the buildings on Pacific Drive or change the nature, charm, or character of the block. He pointed out that this will just give the owners on the south side true ownership of their property. Allan Reumont stated that he is a friend of the Bettingens and supports the vacation and abandonment. He reported that the neighborhood does not currently have a community association and no one's views are guaranteed anyway. He stated that he reviewed the Bettingen's video in its entirety • prior to the meeting and thought how the signatures were being collected was appalling. He noted that people who do not live in the City were signing the petition and that the petition should be taken with a grain of salt. Volume 53 - Page 423 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • Richard Cooling, 2503 Eastbluff Drive, stated that he is an architect and knew where the property lines were when he designed the Westover's house at 2301 Pacific Drive. Regarding the abandonment, he emphasized that no structures can be constructed any closer to Pacific Drive after the vacation than they were prior to the vacation. He stated that he is sorry to see the animosity in the neighborhood and expressed his hope that Council will vote in favor of the abandonment. Ann Stern, 49 S. Hampton Court, stated that she knows the Bettingens and is appalled that some of the neighbors put up signs and banners calling the Bettingens selfish. She believed that passing the abandonment is the right thing to do and encouraged Council to do what is right and not be influenced by the other activities that are meant to distract everyone. Dan Purcell stated that he was just a volunteer in the Corona del Mar 5K Run and found himself in the Bettingen's video. He indicated that the 5K Run is such a great community event but, unfortunately, runners were confronted with signs about selfishness and a lot of misinformation. He confirmed that a water table was set up that looked like it was part of the event and reported that people were trying to get people to sign the petition as they were running by. He believed that there are better ways of presenting your case than what was done. Nancy McNash, 2319 Pacific Drive, stated that she was also appalled with • the goings on at the 5K Run. She expressed her support of the abandonment and does not see any reason why the abandonment should not pass, noting that the City does not seem to be allowing any physical changes. Grant Bettingen stated that he is in favor of the abandonment and noted that he has lived on Pacific Drive since the 1970s. He believed that the abandonment is the right thing to do and will benefit all the neighbors. He stated that the healing process can start at this point in time. Barbara Corbett, 2316 Pacific Drive, requested that Council not approve the request by one resident and their architect to vacate the right -of -way. She stated that a majority of the residents on the street are against the abandonment and noted that they are the ones who have to deal with whatever the affect. She indicated that she was in the 5K Run and that it appeared that both sides were vying for the runners' attention. She reported that there are no vacant lots on the bluff side of Pacific Drive and that most of the houses that were built within the current rules are as large as is suitable in the area. She believed that the community at large would best be served by leaving the street as it is to conserve the beauty of the area both from the Pacific Drive side and the Bayside Drive side, and by not changing the buildable area. She noted that they made their positions clear and requests that Council vote how the majority of the residents would want them to vote. Mayor Noyes confirmed for Mrs. Corbett that her correspondence was • included in the staff report. Roger Ditman stated that he is a friend of the Bettingens. Regarding possible impacts to Pacific Drive, he reiterated that there will be no change Volume 53 - Page 424 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • in the setback or height limitations. Even though the one theoretical possibility is that someone may choose to build higher if they have more land to count as part of their parcel, no one has identified these properties, and added that this is currently their right to build within the code without asking for a variance. Regarding taxation, he stated that only the property owners on the south side might suffer a higher valuation as a consequence, but noted it was the people on the north side that were complaining about the possibility that the people on the south may face higher taxes in the future. Mr. Ditman indicated, however, that the impacts on the Bettingens have been severe during this process to build something that will not have an impact on anyone else on the street. He stated that he supports the abandonment and supports the people on the south side of the street, despite the fact that they should have been granted this a long time ago. Paul Sigelman, 433 N. Camden, stated that he is a friend of the Bettingens and an attorney. Regarding the City's current liability, he stated that he sues every entity involved if someone gets injured on property that is part of an abandonment. He noted that the petition indicates that people who were for the abandonment were pushing the envelope, but the video showed that they were telling people that residents can go forward and out into that abandoned area, therefore, invalidating their own petition. He also pointed out that the architect, Mr. Edwards, reported that the homes will be dropping down and building below most of the existing structure so that there is no affect to the line of sight. • Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Council Member O'Neil stated that it is consorting to him that this quaint two blocks in Corona del Mar can have this bone of contention which has divided them so much and indicated that Council tries to glean as much of the facts when listening to testimony. However, he noted that a lot of what is said really is not relevant to how Council makes its decision when emotions run high. He hoped that the healing process will start now. He clarified that normally the City does not use its power or intervene in these types of neighborhood disputes; however, he believed that Council must act in accordance with staff recommendation based on the facts received from staff, evidence submitted, and testimony received. He stated that he is convinced that the abandonment on the street will not adversely impact the residents on the north side of the street and that it is appropriate to abandon Pacific Drive in the area proposed. He reported that precedence has already been set, noting that Council did a similar action on Ocean Boulevard less than a year ago. In a case in which the property is owned by the City where there are driveways and private improvements encroaching onto easements, he believed that it is prudent for the City to vacate the street right -of -way to make the encroachments legitimate. He also agreed that the exposure to liability is reduced by not owning the property. Referencing the staff report, Council Member O'Neil believed that Council can also make the findings that the road is no longer needed now or in the future for public right -of -way purposes. Further, the amendment to the districting map to modify the • front yard setbacks along Pacific Drive is appropriate because it does allow the homeowners on the south side of the street to recalculate their buildable area to add 350 to 700 square feet down slope, and the height is not affected. He expressed the opinion that the actions will not generate more variances, Volume 53 - Page 425 11081%.4 • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX but may even eliminate more variance applications and the need to these debates that have become so divisive and contentious. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -55 ordering the vacation and abandonment of the street right -of -way in excess of 60 feet in width along the southerly side of Pacific Drive (varying from approximately 12.4 to 19 feet), subject to approval of Zoning Amendment No. 899 on June 27, 2000, to modify property setbacks; direct the City Clerk to have the resolution recorded by the Orange County Recorder subject to the approval of Zoning Amendment No. 899 on June 27, 2000 (Resolution No. 2000 -55 to become effective at the same time as Ordinance No. 2000 -12 which approved Amendment No. 899); and introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -12 approving Amendment No. 899 and pass to second reading on June 27, 2000. Council Member Ridgeway stated that a right -of -way is intended to be used for public purposes; however, it should be restored to private use if it has no public purpose. He noted that the Public Works Director has said there is no public use for this land. Noting that he once lived on Pacific Drive, Council Member Ridgeway stated that the most beautiful thing about the street was the gazebo and the rose garden, but the character was changed substantially and no one objected when they were removed. If there were objections, there was a very gentlemanly, civil approach. He stated that the healing process should start • as he personally believes there is no impact. Council Member Glover stated that there was an abandonment in her district about five or six years ago and, to this day, people on the street are not speaking to each other. She expressed hope that this neighborhood can be above this sort of thing and not let this become a point of contention for many years in the neighborhood. Mr. Webb requested and received confirmation from the maker of the motion, Council Member O'Neil, that the motion also includes the findings that there are no present or perspective public use for the property, as well as no motorized transportation use. Mr. Burnham requested and received confirmation from Council Member O'Neil that the resolution will take affect if, and when, the ordinance takes affect. Council Member Thomson reported that he must abstain from voting on these issues. Noting that he is a real estate agent, he reported that he represented the Bettingens when they sold their house to the Ying Lings and is broker of record for the Cox family and Street family. Further, he stated that he has funds in Mr. Bettingen's investment company. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: • None Abstain: Thomson Absent: None Volume 53 - Page 426 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • 28. NEWPORT DUNES RESORT (NEWPORT DUNES PARTNERSHIP, APPLICANT) - A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, AND PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT PLAN FOR THE 100 -ACRE NEWPORT DUNES PROPERTY AND A CONCEPTUAL PRECISE PLAN FOR A HOTEL AND TIME -SHARE COMPLEX WITH CONFERENCE, MEETING, AND BANQUET FACILITIES, RESTAURANTS, A HEALTH CLUB AND SPA, RETAIL AND SERVICES AREAS, AND SWIMMING POOLS AND LANDSCAPED GARDEN AREAS. Regarding the Newport Dunes Public Hearing, Mayor Noyes reiterated that Council will first receive reports from staff, Planning Commission Chairman Ed Selich on the process they went through, the applicant, the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee, and then the group of homeowners around the Dunes. He stated that the meeting will be adjourned at midnight. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that she will not be going into detail about this project but pointed out that, given the pounds of paper that staff delivered to Council, there has obviously been a great deal of analysis. She indicated that staff believes that they have a good planned community, including design guidelines, that will give the City more input into and control over how this project would be sited. Further, the environmental • impact report has covered all the issues, been prepared in a matter that satisfies the requirements of State law, and that all but four of the significant environmental impacts that were found have been mitigated. Ms. Wood stated that the policy question for Council is whether the General Plan Amendment should be approved, whether a project larger than that allowed by the settlement agreement is in the best interest of the City, and if the project provides enough benefits to the City so it outweighs the four remaining environmental impacts that could not be mitigated (traffic at Coast Highway and Marguerite, long term air quality, short term air quality, visual and aesthetic impacts). She reported that Senior Planner Patrick Alford, Traffic Engineer Rich Edmonston, Deborah Pracilio and Steven Ross from LSA, and Heather Nix from WPA Traffic Engineer are present to answer questions. Ed Selich, Chairman of the Planning Commission, stated that the Planning Commission is the primary advisory body on land use, planning, and zoning matters. He indicated that Council requested that he explain the process the Commission went through, the conclusions reached, and how they reached them because of the time the Commission spent reviewing the Dunes project and the number of meetings it held. He reported that the Commission conducted two study sessions in the fall of 1999 to review the project and the early environmental documentation. This also gave the Commission an early orientation to the project and allowed them to present the project as a discussion item at a later regular meeting. He stated that they started the • public hearing process in January which eventually totaled seven hearings over five months. Noting the importance of public participation, he indicated that they made all possible attempts to publicize the meetings through the legal notification process, as well as using the local press. Mr. Selich stated Volume 53 - Page 427 INDEX Newport Dunes Resort/ GPA 97 -3(F)/ PCA 878 (45) • • u City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 that they adhered to a strict three minute time limit on public testimony and advised the public at the beginning of each meeting of the time limit and encouraged everyone to present their points in outline form, give the Commission new information to assist in the deliberations, and follow up with written supplementary information to support their oral testimony. He reported that they heard well over 100 speakers and that, even though they were not conducting a plebiscite, speakers in favor and in opposition were remarkably even in their numbers. He added that the Commission also received hundreds of pages of letters, faxes, and emails, as well as telephone calls about the project. In trying to follow a logical path in deliberations so that the public could follow the Commission's progress and participate in the deliberations, Mr. Selich stated that the Commission started from the broad perspective of whether or not the project was worth considering and sequentially narrowed the deliberations down to project design factors and impact mitigation. He reported that, at the end of each meeting, they carefully explained what had been done that evening and, at the beginning of each subsequent meeting, the Commission recapped where they were and what they were going to try to accomplish that evening. They also kept track of each question raised and then answered them in the staff report for the following meeting. He indicated that the Commission feels that, with all this extra effort, those citizens that wanted to participate in the deliberations had ample opportunity to do so and have their testimony, oral and written, carefully considered by the Commission. Mr. Selich stated that the Commission spent hundreds of hours going through the hundreds of pages of documents and studies, as well as visiting the site and public and private properties that had the potential to be impacted by the project. He indicated that, in his 20 some years as a professional planner and developer, he has never seen a project so thoroughly analyzed by a planning commission, public participation so actively sought, and so much time spent to insure that a proper decision and recommendation to the legislative body was rendered. He noted that the Commission's recommendation was unanimous, although individual members may have preferred something slightly different here and there. Mr. Selich indicated that the Commission deliberations began with the basic question of whether the project had enough merit to pursue or whether it was so out of character and scale with the community that it should not move ahead. He reported that the Commission was advised by the City Attorney that the baseline for consideration is the 1983 Settlement Agreement as amended. He noted that the agreement provided for the development of a 275 room /500,000+ square foot hotel and ancillary uses. Although there is a proposal for a 165,000 square foot/275 room facility which was previously done, the Commission determined that the baseline is what is permitted under the settlement agreement and is much broader than the proposal. The Commission concurred that the spirit of the settlement agreement should be honored but that no agreement is perfect and, if a better project can result and be within the spirit of the agreement, then they would be remiss in their duty to the City if they did not pursue the improved project. He reported that the Commission concluded early on that the proposal had sufficient merit to warrant serious consideration but only if it Volume 53 - Page 428 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • could be demonstrated that it was a significantly better project than that which is permitted under the settlement agreement, is of benefit to the greater community, and all the impacts upon nearby and adjacent properties could adequately be mitigated. Mr. Selich reported that they then proceeded to evaluate the proposal's location and access. Regarding the location, the Commission had staff and the applicant evaluate alternative locations for the hotel, possibly the other side of the lagoon. The Commission determined that this was not feasible primarily due to the narrow configuration of land area between Backbay Drive and the lagoon, which would have made for a long, narrow structure. Further, it was determined that it would be difficult to relocate the RV area, day use parking, and boat launching facility. The Commission determined that the proposed location of the hotel was the most appropriate location considering the existing uses and the size and configuration of the Dunes property. Regarding alternative access to the hotel, the Commission again had staff and the applicant evaluate access to the hotel (all access coming from Backbay Drive and employee and service traffic only on Backbay Drive). He reported that the analysis concluded that, in order to provide access from Backbay Drive, there would be a significant loss of RV spaces and that a parking structure would be required to make up the lost day use spaces that would be converted to RV use to maintain a minimum number of RV spaces. The Commission determined that the loss of RV spaces, the cost of providing day use parking, and the inefficient site layout that would be a • result was not worth the advantages gained by primary access being taken off Backbay Drive. However, the Commission did determine that the employee and delivery traffic could come through the RV Park and take some of the traffic off of Backbay Drive. Mr. Selich expressed the Commission's concern that the hotel fit on the site and did not appear to be too massive or inappropriately scaled to its surroundings, about view blockages from both public and private perspectives, and how the hotel structure would appear from various public and private viewpoints. Rather than use story poles on a structure of this size, the Commission encouraged the applicant to make maximum use contemporary computer modeling techniques to provide visuals of what the completed project would look like. Additionally, they decided to erect balloons at key high points of the structure to supplement the computer analysis. He indicated that they publicized the 10 -day period in which the balloons would fly as much as possible in order for the public to be able to see them. He reported that the balloon experiment was met with mixed results; however, the Commission felt that they had a good feel for how the project would appear when constructed. Following this, he stated that the Commission dealt with size, height, and bulk issues. The Commission felt that the three story timeshare units on the water adjacent to the marina and across from Dover Shores were too high. He stated that they received testimony from residents that they felt the structure would have a great impact on them. He indicated that the • Commission felt that a more gradual transition from the water to the highest points of the hotel was more desirable, so the Commission lowered the timeshare units to two -story structures, generally the same height as on two - story single family homes on the bay. Regarding the overall height of the Volume 53 - Page 429 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 • structure, the Commission felt that limiting it to 38.5 feet in the settlement agreement would create a monotonous box devoid of architectural character, but that tower elements and variable roof lines all add interest and character to a building of this size. However, the Commission did feel that the overall height was a little too tall for the site and removed the fifth story element with a commensurate reduction in the height of the elevator towers and other architectural features. Additionally, the Commission discussed lowering the first level of the parking structure underground, but felt it was not worth the cost. He stated that the applicant worked out a revision to the grading to allow the site to be reduced two to three feet to further reduce the height of the structure in relationship to its surroundings. Mr. Selich stated that they received testimony from Bayside Village residents who felt that the hotel was too close to them and they would have noise and view impacts. He reported that, with the reduction of height, square footage, and number of rooms, it was possible for the parking structure to be moved an additional 40 feet from Bayside Village and the loading dock reoriented away from Bayside Village. This resulted in a reduction of 30 rooms and 25 timeshare units. He reported that the Commission also limited lock -off units of 25 timeshares to be used as 50 hotel rooms. He stated that, using the room count methodology, there are a total of 470 hotel rooms. He indicated that the structure then became a four story building with 12 percent of the foot print at a four story height and an additional four percent over 38.5 feet, for a total of 16 percent of the • footprint exceeding the height permitted in the settlement agreement. Mr. Selich reported that they received substantial public testimony on the size and operation of the conference facilities. He stated that the Commission wanted to make sure the City would have a hotel with conference facilities and not a convention center that happened to be part of a hotel. Further, they wanted to have the facility sized to meet community needs but allow sufficient size to allow the hotel to operate at optimum levels on a year round basis. He stated that the Commission received testimony on the need for additional conference space for local community events. This was supplemented by a conference space study conducted for the City a couple of years ago and the Commission also studied other similar hotels and the amount of conference space they contained. He reported that the Commission initially cut the conference space, but partially restored it to a level they felt would provide the needed meeting space and allow the hotel to perform at optimum level due to additional information from the applicant. Mr. Selich stated that the foremost impact to consider was traffic, but noted that hotels generate less peak hour traffic than other uses. He reported that the reduced size brought the project to a size that made traffic neutral in comparison to the provisions of the settlement agreement. He pointed out these traffic numbers have been carried in the City's General Plan and traffic studies for nearly 20 years. Following testimony and study, the Commission concluded that, although reasonable people can disagree on methodology and assumptions, the traffic study was consistent with the • City's methodology and historical assumptions and that it was a reasonable projection of the project's impact upon the circulation system. He reported that both the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and long range analysis did not indicate any traffic problems that could not be mitigated, other than the Volume 53 - Page 430 INDEX J • • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 Coast Highway/Marguerite intersection which has a long range problem with or without the project. Regarding concerns expressed by the public that the Bayside Drive and Coast Highway intersection, bridge across the bay, and Bayside Drive would be severely impacted, he stated that the Commission felt that the traffic studies did not support those concerns. However, the Commission did approve a gated entry concept to be shared by Bayside Village and the hotel as a way to ensure that Bayside Village would have less of an impact from the hotel. Mr. Selich stated that parking was a major concern for the Commission and the public that testified. He reported that the parking demand analysis concluded that there was sufficient parking if the entire Dunes property was considered. However, the Commission was sufficiently concerned about this to condition that a Parking Management Plan be developed and brought back to the Commission for review and approval. Further, he reported that the Commission added conditions on noise control that was more restrictive than the current noise ordinance; added conditions for a detailed lighting plan; and the mitigation measures contained in the Environmental Impact Report place a host of water quality conditions on the project to ensure that the water quality of the bay is maintained. He reported that the Commission also placed quality and design controls in the development agreement and Planning Commission zoning text to ensure that the project is constructed to the highest standards and subject to further review by the Commission for detailed architectural design, including color and materials, detailed landscaping, parking and parking management, and onsite circulation and access. Through the Planning Commission zoning text, the Commission was also able to get an improved public walkway system around the lagoon which will be more inviting and pedestrian - friendly to the public than what presently exists. Mr. Selich indicated that he compiled a comparison of what he thought were the 13 most important aspects of the project and how they compared under the settlement agreement and the proposed project. The following is a summary of the comparison: Issue Settlement Agreement 1. Traffic about 4,000 trip /day 2. Height 3 story; 38.5' maximum 3. Floor Area 530,000 sq. ft. 4. Rooms 275 rooms 5. Conference 400 people; no max sq. ft. 6. Location No control 7. Building No control Design 8. Site Design No control 9. Noise No control above noise ordinance 10. Lighting No control above ordinance Recommended Proieet about 4,000 trip /day Traffic neutral with permitted project 4 story; 16% above 3 story. 62' (72' msl) at elevator tower. 52.5' (62.5' msl) at 4'^ story. Within T of Bay Club tower, 10' below average bluff height. 581,000 sq. ft., 10% increase 470 -150 RVs = 320 - 275 =45 net increase 31,000 sq. ft.; peak hour control, maximum number in summer Control location through use permit Control design features & quality with use permit & development agreement Control site design through use permit Control through use permit Control through use permit Volume 53 - Page 431 INDEX • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 INDEX 11. Water No additional benefits Quality 12. Environ. None required Review 13. Improved No ability to get Public Access Upgraded drainage devices; improved water quality Full environmental review required Improve public access through Planning Commission regulations, development agreement Mr. Selich expressed the opinion that the project, as revised by the Commission, did meet the overall test of being significantly improved, of being of value to the greater community, and containing improved impact mitigation measures, and therefore worthy of recommendation to Council. Mr. Selich noted that his presentation did not mention the financial or fiscal impacts to the City. He stated that, while these cannot be ignored, they did not play a major role in their discussions even though they received a presentation relative to fiscal impacts. However, he noted that, if the presentation showed a negative impact on the City's fiscal balance, it would have undoubtedly played a larger role. Mr. Selich stated that the presentation was a very superficial overview of what the Planning Commission did and, by no means, adequately reflects the hard work he and the Commission did in crafting the recommendations presented to Council tonight. He indicated that the Commission believes they forwarded a set of recommendations that will allow for a greatly improved development compared to what would be experienced if development were to move forward in accordance with the existing settlement agreement. He concluded by stating that the project is slightly larger, but is also greatly improved. He stated that Planning Commissioners Anne Gifford and Larry Tucker are also present tonight. Council Member Debay asked Mr. Selich to give a copy of his presentation to the City Clerk and also requested a copy for herself. She further encouraged the reporters to use the presentation as a reference. Robert Gleason, applicant, Newport Dunes, stated that his presentation is about 45 to 50 minutes long and suggested that he not begin if the meeting is to end at midnight. He indicated that it might be more appropriate to continue this to the next meeting. Mayor Noyes suggested that the meeting be adjourned at this time. Council Member Ridgeway noted that he will not be in attendance at the next meeting. Council Member O'Neil suggested conducting a special meeting or starting the meeting earlier due to the advantage of having continuity in the presentations. Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to continue this item to the June 27 meeting at 6:00 p.m. City Manager Bludau stated that he will try to keep the agenda lean since this is the major topic. • Council Member Glover commended Mr. Selich on his presentation. She stated that she is very proud of the City's Planning Commission and that it is probably the best the City has ever had. She indicated to Mr. Selich that Council may want him to give his presentation again to have continuity. Volume 53 - Page 432 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 13, 2000 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None. ADJOURNMENT - Adjourned at 11:35 p.m. to a regular meeting on June 27, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. in memory of Renee Segerstrom and wishing Maintenance Worker I Gary Prather luck in his recovery. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on June 7, 2000, at 3:40 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk • Recording Secretary y W. Mayor Volume 53 - Page 433 INDEX