Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/25/2000 - Regular Meeting0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Regular Meeting July 25, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION MEETING - 5:00 p.m [Refer to separate minutes] STUDY SESSION - 5:05 p.m. [Refer to separate minutes] CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 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 - Council Member O'Neil. • Invocation by Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer, Public Works Department. Presentation of Cultural Arts Grants for FY 2000 -01 by Roberta Jorgensen, Chairman of the City Arts Commission. Ms. Jorgensen stated that the programs receiving grants will reach approximately 11,000 Newport Beach school children in the 2nd through 12th grades and 4,000 adult residents. She stated that $120,000 in grants were requested and reviewed by the City Arts Commission with a recommendation made to the City Council for $40,000 in awards. The groups receiving grants will be expected to give a report on what they did with the money, how many were in attendance at their programs and what was accomplished. Ms. Jorgensen began presenting grant checks to the recipients. She read the names of all of the recipients and those present in the audience came forward to accept their checks. The recipients included Ballet Montmartre, Ballet Pacifica, Baroque Music Festival, Bowers Museum of Cultural Arts, Festival Ballet Theatre, Laguna Playhouse, Lincoln Elementary School Parent%Faculty Organization, Newport Beach Film Festival, Newport Beach Sister Cities Association, Newport Harbor Nautical Museum, Once Upon A Story, Orange County Museum of Art, Pacific Chorale, Pacific Symphony Orchestra, Philharmonic Society of Orange County, Readers Repertory Theatre, South Coast Repertory, Southland Opera, Stop -Gap and William Hall Master Chorale. • CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): Volume 53 - Page 498 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX • • Mayor Noyes announced that he and the City Manager met with the current and past chairmen of the Newport Beach Conference & Visitors Bureau (CVB), Henry Schielein of the Balboa Bay Club and Mehdi Eftekari of the Four Seasons Hotel, respectively. Mayor Noyes acknowledged both chairmen for providing such strong leadership since the passing of Rosalind Williams. He added that the CVB would be working at filling the Executive Director position. Mayor Noyes stated that he, the City Manager and the Administrative Services Director met with Mr. Schielein and Mr. Eftekari to discuss some of the City's issues and stated that the CVB works to bring visitors to the City's hotels and restaurants. • Mayor Noyes requested that the model being worked on by the Planning Department for development fees in the airport area be placed on a future Study Session agenda, possibly in a month. He stated that the City Council could use the model to establish and implement a policy. • Council Member Debay announced that Dennis Rodman is not eligible to run for the City Council because he is not a registered voter. • Council Member Glover stated that two trees on public property in her district were recently cut down illegally. She stated that she has realized that the City's policy may need to be strengthened. She requested a clarification of Council Policy G -1, Retention or Removal of City Trees, be placed on a future agenda. Council Member Glover specifically asked for an explanation of what occurs when someone illegally cuts down a tree and why they are currently not being • prosecuted. She requested that if the Policy is found not to be strong enough, that the City Attorney provide information on how to strengthen it. Council Member Glover stated that too many trees in her district are being cut down. She added that she understands the preservation of views in other areas, but can't respect the removal of trees in the interior neighborhoods. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 11, 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. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 3. CORONA DEL MAR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Res 2000 -67 RENEWAL, ANNUAL REPORT FOR 1999 -2000 FISCAL YEAR, AND CdM Business ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO LEVY FOR 2000- Improvement 2001 FISCAL YEAR. 1) Approve Corona del Mar Business Improvement District District 1999 -2000 Annual Report; and 2) adopt Resolution of Intention (27) • No. 2000 -67 to levy for 2000 -2001 Fiscal Year and set the public hearing for August 22, 2000. Volume 53 - Page 499 u • r1 LJ City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF ENHANCED RETIREMENT FOR SAFETY C -563 EMPLOYEES. Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -68 declaring the City's intention Res 2000 -68 to approve an amendment to the contract between the Board of Enhanced Retirement/ Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System and the Safety Employees City Council, City of Newport Beach. (38/66) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 5. 2000 -2001 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT - AWARD OF CONTRACT C -3351 (C- 3351). 1) Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract Slurry Seal (C -3351) to California Pavement Maintenance Company, Inc. for the total Project bid price of $334,340 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute (38) the contract; and 3) establish an amount of $33,000 to cover the cost of testing and unforeseen work. 6. CENTRAL BALBOA WATER, SEWER & ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS C -3278 AND WEST NEWPORT BEACH SEWER MAIN REPLACEMENT, Central Balboa & PHASE II - (C -3278) - COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. 1) Accept West Newport Beach the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; Sewer Improvements 3) authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days (38) 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. 7. DOVER DRIVE, WESTCLIFF AND DOVER SHORES STREET C -3317 REHABILITATION (C -3317) - COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. Dover Drive, 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; Westcliff & 3) authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days Dover Shores after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with Street Rehabilitation applicable portions of the Civil Code; and 4) release the Faithful (38) Performance Bond one year after Council acceptance. 8. PURCHASE OF SOFTWARE FOR RECREATION SCHEDULING. C -3361 Authorize the agreement with Sierra Digital for $59,200 for the acquisition Recreation of software for recreation activity registration and facility reservations, Scheduling subject to prior review and approval by the City Attorney's office. (38) MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 9. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR JULY 20, 2000. Receive and Planning file. (68) 10. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -002) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BA -002 PUMPOUT FACILITY AT FERNANDO STREET DOCK. Approve Fernando Street BA -002 in the amount of $36,000 to increase revenue estimates and increase Dock Pumpout expenditure appropriations following receipt of State Boating and Facility Waterways Grant. (40/51) 11. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -073) TO TRANSFER $125,802 FROM BA -073 THE LIBRARY LIABILITY ACCOUNT 800 -2248, DONATIONS GIVEN Library TO THE LIBRARY FOR DEDICATED PURPOSES FOR THE Material Volume 53 - Page 500 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 . PURCHASE OF LIBRARY MATERIAL, TO REVENUE ACCOUNT 4010 -5901. Approve BA -073. (City Clerk Harkless noted that the budget amendment was for the 1999 -2000 budget year and numbered accordingly.) 12. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Council Member Thomson. 13. ANNUAL RECYCLING REPORT. Receive and file. 14. AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY I -8 REGARDING BIKE, FOOT RACE AND SURF POLICY. Approve revised Council Policy I -8. 15. PROPERTY INSURANCE RENEWAL. Approve the renewal of the entire property insurance coverage outlined in Attachment A of the staff report for FY 2000 -01 for a total premium of $328,604. 16. GENERAL LIABILITY EXCESS INSURANCE RENEWAL. Approve the renewal of the excess general liability insurance coverage with ICW for FY 2000 -01 for $268,000 in annual premium and for FY 2001 -02 for a total premium not to exceed $294,800 as indicated by the rate guarantee. 17. STAFF SUPPORT FOR THE ARTS FOUNDATION. Deny request based on Council Policy A -5, unless Council believes an exception to the policy is warranted. • Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to approve the Consent Calendar, except for the item removed (12), and noting the amendment to the action on Item No. 11. 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 ITEM REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 12. TRAFFIC CONTROL ON MARGUERITE AVENUE AT SANDCASTLE DRIVE (contd. from 7/11/00). Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston stated that Mr. Bob Curci brought the issues at the intersection to the attention of staff and attended a meeting of the Traffic Affairs Committee, where the appropriateness of a STOP sign at the location was discussed. Manager Edmonston stated that staff conducted counts at the intersection and reviewed the accident history. He stated that the volume of traffic on the busiest of the two side streets was only about 20% of what would be needed to justify putting in a STOP sign at the intersection. He added that the • numbers are based on standardized traffic warrants for arterial highways and that Marguerite Avenue is considered an arterial highway. Manager Edmonston stated that it was also found that there were no traffic accidents Volume 53 - Page 501 INDEX (40/50) Recycling (44) Bike, Foot Race & Surf Policy /I -8 (69) Property Insurance (47) General Liability Excess Insurance Renewal (47) Arts Foundation (62) Traffic Control on Marguerite Avenue (85) • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX in the previous three and one half years involving vehicles exiting from Sandcastle Drive onto Marguerite Avenue. Manager Edmonston stated that, based on the findings, the Traffic Affairs Committee recommended street striping to create a "refuge area" that would allow a car to pull out half way, stop and continue with their left turn when they felt it was safe to do so. He added that this alternate was acceptable to Mr. Curci at the meeting, but that subsequent to the meeting, some people in the community have stated that they would still prefer a STOP sign at the location. Motion by Council Member Thomson to delay action on the STOP signs on Marguerite Avenue at Sandcastle Drive until 180 days after installation of the new street striping; request that the street striping provide for a double -wide "refuge area" with a single lane on Marguerite Avenue in front of Oasis Senior Center in both directions and left turn lanes from southbound Marguerite Avenue into Sandcastle Drive and from northbound Marguerite Avenue into Sandcastle Drive and Harbor View Drive; and direct staff to bring the item back to the City Council if the street striping does not work or there is opposition to it from the residents. Council Member Thomson stated that this action should slow the traffic on Marguerite Avenue. • Council Member Ridgeway asked if Council Member Thomson's motion was equivalent to Alternate A, as presented in the staff report. Manager Edmonston stated that Alternate A creates the "refuge area" by eliminating one of the four lanes. He added that the motion combines Alternate A and Alternate B, leaving one lane in both directions on Marguerite Avenue from Fifth Avenue to Harbor View Drive. He stated that this provides for a wider "refuge area" and has the potential for traffic calming. Council Member Thomson pointed out that Marguerite Avenue, south of Fifth Avenue, has a single lane in both directions and STOP signs are used for traffic calming. He stated that his proposal would continue the one lane traffic farther north on Marguerite Avenue. Per Council Member Ridgeway's request, Manager Edmonston stated that staff concurs that one lane of traffic in both directions would be adequate to accommodate the volume of traffic on Marguerite Avenue. Per Council Member Glover's request, Manager Edmonston explained that staff was made aware of Council Member Thomson's proposal the previous Friday and feels that traffic would still flow through the area smoothly under the new plan. Mr. Bob Curci, a resident in the area, stated that he did petition the Traffic Affairs Committee to look into the hazardous problem at Marguerite Avenue and Sandcastle Drive. He stated that traffic has increased on Marguerite • Avenue over the years and affects the safety of the residents and visitors of the area. He stated that drivers exiting Sandcastle Drive have an obstructed view due to the curve in Marguerite Avenue, a monument sign for the Volume 53 - Page 502 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • Harbor View Hills Homeowners Association, a berm, a lamppost and, in some situations, a passenger. Mr. Curci added that commuter traffic and people not obeying the 40 miles per hour speed limit exasperate the problem. He stated that a STOP sign was what he preferred, but he was willing to give the creation of a "refuge area" a try. He stated that he informed the Harbor View Hills South Homeowners Association Board of Directors of the compromise, but the Board and the attendees at the meeting did not agree with the compromise. Mr. Curci referred to the letter of July 7, 2000, written by Mr. Mike Favrean, President of the Harbor View Hills South Homeowners Association. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the letter would be a part of the record. Mr. Curci stated his support for Council Member Thomson's motion, but requested that the item be revisited and a STOP sign be considered if the proposal does not cure the problem. Council Member Thomson confirmed that his motion does include the item being revisited if the problem is not solved. 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 COMMENTS Rena Wills, 5411 Seashore Drive, stated that she wanted to address the noise issue associated with surfing contests. She stated that she understood the need for speakers to make announcements at the contests, but felt that the music being played in- between announcements was unnecessary. Ms. Wills stated that loud music does not belong on the beach. She proposed that the problem of loud speaker music be included in the permit process, holding the applicant responsible and requiring that flyers be distributed when the permit is issued. Walt Howald, 318 Apolena, Board of Library Trustees, announced that the John Cotton Dana Library Public Relations Award, a national award, was recently received by the City and recognizes the Distinguished Lecture Series and Panel Series conducted through the library. He stated that he wanted to share the award with the City Council and express the Board's appreciation for the support of the City Council. Mr. Howald noted that he was just appointed to the Board in June of this year. Council Member Debay referred to a letter recently received from Patrick Bartolic, Chairman of the Board of Library Trustees, and Lawrence Spitz, • President of the Library Foundation. She read from the letter, noting that the Board and the Foundation are working on areas of activity that require mutual planning and are moving in a positive and fruitful direction. Council Volume 53 - Page 503 INDEX Volume 53 - Page 504 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX • Member Debay encouraged and complimented the process. Mr. Howald stated that the Board and the Foundation are enjoying a good relationship and acknowledged Mr. Spitz for his assistance in orienting Mr. Howald to the process. Dolores Otting, a City resident, expressed her concern that Study Sessions are being held in the afternoon and that action is being taken at the meetings. She stated that the meetings are not televised and it is difficult for many people to attend a day meeting. Ms. Otting read from Section 54953.6 of the new Brown Act, which states that a legislative body cannot restrict the broadcast of its proceedings in the absence of a reasonable finding that the broadcast cannot be accomplished without causing a disruption of the proceedings. Ms. Otting stated that the meetings should be televised and stated that she would provide the City Clerk with a copy of the Act. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated his feeling that any opposition to the undergrounding of utilities will be ignored. He stated that the undergrounding of utilities does not benefit the community and encouraged those that were opposed to it to pay their assessments under protest. Mr. Hildreth added that the sewage transfer station is still emanating a great deal of smell and that there is a problem with fly infestation in the area on Little Balboa Island. He questioned the use of the Little Balboa Island Property Owners Association to aid in the balloting process. • Philip Arst, representing the Greenlight initiative group, stated that a letter was sent to the City Council on July 14, 2000, requesting a sense of fairness by redoing the Greenlight ballot measure title to accurately describe it in comparison to the counter initiative. He stated that a change in the title will give the voters a fair chance to understand what they are voting on. Mr. Arst stated that a separate letter was sent protesting the title and summary on the petition for the traffic planning and improvements initiative because it contained information that could mislead voters. He stated that the playing field should be leveled. He requested that the City Council direct staff to work with the Greenlight initiative group in developing a ballot title and summary that fairly depicts the initiative. Joe Catron stated that he belongs to the oldest surfing club in Newport Beach and that his club has had contests in Newport for the last fifteen years. He stated that they have two contests per year and have always complied with City requirements. He stated that their contests are free, are conducted for the kids and have no amplified sound. He requested that the City Council allow his club's contests to continue. PUBLIC HEARING 18. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF VARIANCE Variance 1237 NO. 1237 - NAVAI RESIDENCE - 1201 KINGS ROAD - REQUEST TO 1201 Kings Road PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND STORY ADDITION (91) TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, PORTIONS OF • WHICH WILL EXCEED THE 24 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT RANGING FROM 1 FOOT TO 9 FEET (JIM NAVAL APPELLANT) (contd. from Volume 53 - Page 504 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • 6/27/00). Mayor Noyes stated that he intends to refer the item back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. There being no testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Motion by Mayor Noyes to refer the item back to the Planning Commission. Council Member Ridgeway requested that the motion include a requirement that the applicant submit a project with a change from the previously denied project. Mayor Noyes agreed to include the requirement in his motion. Council Member O'Neil noted that the applicant is in agreement with the project going back to the Planning Commission. 19. SANTIAGO DRIVE/HOLIDAY ROAD AREA TRAFFIC CALMING. Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston stated that a meeting was held at a residence on Santiago two weeks prior. He stated that approximately 200 people were notified of the meeting and over 50 attended. He stated that the City's consultant was present at the meeting and several alternatives were presented. Manager Edmonston stated that the consultant's recommendation was to put up a series of islands on Santiago Drive and Holiday Road. He stated that the islands are intended to accommodate pedestrians and also slow vehicular speeds. Manager Edmonston illustrated the islands with drawings on display at the meeting. He stated that the concept received a consensus support from those in attendance at the meeting. Manager Edmonston stated that staff is recommending that the City Council approve the concept. He stated that staff wants to know if they are headed in the right direction before meeting with residents from each of the streets separately and fine- tuning the concept with a design professional and possibly a landscape architect. Manager Edmonston added that the • residents have expressed a willingness to be responsible for the irrigation and maintenance of the planter areas. He concluded by stating that a lot of details still need to be worked out and cost estimates performed. Volume 53 - Page 505 hVIT9.4 Santiago Drive/ Holiday Road Traffic Calming (85) The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes • Abstain: Abstain: None None Absent: None 19. SANTIAGO DRIVE/HOLIDAY ROAD AREA TRAFFIC CALMING. Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston stated that a meeting was held at a residence on Santiago two weeks prior. He stated that approximately 200 people were notified of the meeting and over 50 attended. He stated that the City's consultant was present at the meeting and several alternatives were presented. Manager Edmonston stated that the consultant's recommendation was to put up a series of islands on Santiago Drive and Holiday Road. He stated that the islands are intended to accommodate pedestrians and also slow vehicular speeds. Manager Edmonston illustrated the islands with drawings on display at the meeting. He stated that the concept received a consensus support from those in attendance at the meeting. Manager Edmonston stated that staff is recommending that the City Council approve the concept. He stated that staff wants to know if they are headed in the right direction before meeting with residents from each of the streets separately and fine- tuning the concept with a design professional and possibly a landscape architect. Manager Edmonston added that the • residents have expressed a willingness to be responsible for the irrigation and maintenance of the planter areas. He concluded by stating that a lot of details still need to be worked out and cost estimates performed. Volume 53 - Page 505 hVIT9.4 Santiago Drive/ Holiday Road Traffic Calming (85) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • Council Member Glover complimented the work that has been done and knows staff has attempted to set up a pattern for traffic mitigation as outlined in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. She added that the process was started several years ago by the prior District 4 council member, Tom Edwards, who was also in attendance at the current meeting. Manager Edmonston confirmed for Council Member Ridgeway that the technique being recommended is used to slow speeds by narrowing the roadway. He further confirmed that parked vehicles also act to narrow streets. Manager Edmonston stated that when the project comes before the City Council for approval, it will most likely include a recommendation to reduce the speed limit to 25 miles per hour. Council Member Ridgeway asked if bicycles were allowed on sidewalks in the City. Manager Edmonston explained that the California Vehicle Code states that bicycles are not allowed on sidewalks, but also delegates the ability to local jurisdictions to designate sidewalks where bicycles are permitted. He added that the City has a fairly extensive network of those types of sidewalks. Council Member Ridgeway further confirmed with Manager Edmonston that the plan was prepared with the concept that the recreational bicyclist could ride on the sidewalk. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he does not see any effective difference in • the way the bicyclists are accommodated in the proposal and through existing conditions. He stated that there is currently no bike lane. Motion by Council Member Glover to approve the concept of using landscaped islands to reduce speeds on Santiago Drive and Holiday Road between Irvine and Tustin Avenues; and directed staff to retain a landscape architect or new consultant to assist in the final design and plan preparation for the traffic calming measures. 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 20. ANALYSIS OF PROTECTION FROM TRAFFIC AND GROWTH INITIATIVE (contd. from 6/27/00 and 7/11/00). City Attorney Burnham stated that John Douglas of The Planning Center prepared the raw data for the analysis of the Protection from Traffic and Growth (Greenlight) initiative and drew some conclusions. City Attorney Burnham stated that staff then made an analysis from the information provided. . Mayor Pro Tern Adams suggested that Mr. Douglas outline what he was asked to do by the City, summarize his findings and then go through each of the general plan amendments that would have required a vote of the people Volume 53 - Page 506 INDEX Protection from Traffic & Growth Initiative/ Greenlight (39/69) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX over the last ten years if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect. He suggested that each of the amendments be described along with its density and traffic impact. Mr. Douglas stated that The Planning Center was hired by the City not to evaluate the merits of the initiative, but to lay out factual information in a neutral fashion so that community members could make a decision on whether the initiative would make good public policy. He added that he was asked to develop some assumptions and methodology for evaluating the initiative, to use this in compiling a list of the amendments that had been approved by the City over the last ten years and then to draw some conclusions. Mr. Douglas stated that one of the conclusions that was of interest was the determination on which of the statistical areas in the City were built -out, or had reached one or more of the thresholds as described in the initiative. He stated that the second conclusion that was of high interest was the determination on which of the amendments that were approved by the City over the last ten years would have required a vote of the people if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect since 1990. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked Mr. Douglas to provide an overview of what the Greenlight initiative is for those that are not familiar with it. Mr. Douglas stated that the Greenlight initiative would require that major amendments to the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan be put to a vote of the people if they are approved by the City Council. He stated that • the initiative defines an amendment as "major" if it exceeds any of three thresholds. Mr. Douglas stated that the thresholds are 100 dwelling units, 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area and 100 peak hour trips. Per Council Member O'Neil's question, Mr. Douglas stated that the definition of "peak hour" is dependent upon the local conditions. He stated that the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Manual identifies peak hour as whatever the peak hour of the adjacent arterial roadway is. Mr. Douglas stated that these were assumptions made in his analysis. Mr. Douglas stated that the initiative further defines "major' amendment as not only including the amendment itself but also any amendments in the same statistical area that were approved in the previous ten years. He explained that this is referred to as the cumulative provision in the initiative. City Attorney Burnham corrected him by adding that it's 80% of previous amendments. Council Member Ridgeway added that it does not include voter - approved amendments. Mr. Douglas further clarified that voter- approved amendments are not included in the tabulation of cumulative amendments. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he'd like people to understand that the Greenlight initiative does not change any of the current entitlements that a general plan amendment currently must go through. • Council Member Ridgeway asked if this would include Coastal Commission approval for amendments in the coastal zone. Mr. Douglas stated that he did not believe that the issue is addressed in the initiative. City Attorney Volume 53 - Page 507 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • Burnham stated that the Greenlight initiative does not include the requirement. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed that the Greenlight initiative is limited to projects approved by the City Council. Council Member Ridgeway asked if the Greenlight initiative suggests any traffic solutions. Mr. Douglas stated that he did not believe so. Council Member Debay asked for a clarification on when the votes of the people would take place. City Attorney Burnham stated that the Greenlight initiative specifies that the vote can take place at either a general regular municipal election or at a special election called for that purpose if the City and the project proponent agree to split the costs. City Clerk Harkless stated that the County usually quotes the cost of a special election as between $1 and $2 per registered voter, or approximately $80,000. City Manager Bludau stated that he also understands that the project proponent can bypass the normal process by going to an automatic vote of the people. Council Member Ridgeway asked if the environmental impact report (EIR) review process would also be bypassed. City Attorney Burnham stated that the Greenlight initiative does not include such a provision, but added that it is an option that already exists. City Attorney Burnham cited Measure A as an example and confirmed that land use amendments can be approved by the voters pursuant to the initiative process. • Mr. Douglas stated that he began the project by looking at what assumptions and methods should be used to generate the analysis. He stated that a couple of key assumptions are worth pointing out. First, in tabulating the amendments, he stated that he used the full entitlement that would be allowed by the amendment even if it was built -out at a lower intensity. Secondly, he stated that if an amendment changed the land use, he calculated the number of trips generated by the existing use and subtracted it from the trips that would be generated by the new use, which produced a net evaluation of trips. Thirdly, Mr. Douglas stated that if an amendment would result in a net reduction of trips, he put zero in for dwelling units, square footage and trips when the cumulative analysis was done. He additionally pointed out that no credit was given for land uses eliminated. Mr. Douglas concluded by stating that if different assumptions are used, different conclusions will be made. He stated that after he compiled the assumptions, he researched all of the amendments to the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan that had been approved in the previous ten years and that reflected some change in the entitlement for a property. He stated that this list included fifty -one amendments and are summarized in Table 2, General Plan Amendment Summary November 1990 to June 2000, of The Planning Center's report. Council Member Ridgeway suggested that Mr. Douglas continue with a broad overview of his report. • Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that the list of the general plan amendments that would have required a vote be discussed briefly so that the public can be made aware of which projects would have been affected, if the Volume 53 - Page 508 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 Greenlight initiative had been in effect. Mr. Douglas continued by stating that Table 3, General Plan Amendment Cumulative Analysis, is a compilation by statistical area of all the amendments. He stated that it adds up the dwelling units, floor area and trips for each amendment and then takes 80% of each of those, as specified in the Greenlight initiative. He stated that Table 3 lists those statistical areas that have reached one or more of the thresholds discussed earlier. He stated that the six statistical areas where development thresholds have been exceeded include Old Newport Boulevard (Hl), Newport Center (LI), North Ford (L3), Airport Area (L4), Pacific View (M3) and Bonita Canyon (M6). Council Member Glover asked for an explanation of what the purpose was in establishing the statistical areas. Planning Director Temple stated that the statistical areas in the City were devised in the early 1970's to keep an organized data set. The original divisions were subsets of U. S. Government Census tracts and were a comfortable way of keeping data. Council Member Glover confirmed with Planning Director Temple that the correlation between the statistical areas and traffic circulation would be how the floor area and development limits are set forth in the Land Use Element, which is organized by statistical areas. Council Member O'Neil confirmed with Mr. Douglas that the number of statistical areas varies because in some cases, statistical areas are combined • in the text of the Land Use Element. Mr. Douglas stated that he lumped those together in his analysis. Council Member Debay pointed out that some of the fifty -one amendments actually changed areas back into Recreational and Environmental Open Space and others actually decreased traffic. Mr. Douglas agreed. Mr. Douglas stated that the purpose of Table 3 was to look forward if the Greenlight initiative is passed. He stated that Table 3 looks forward beyond November 2000, applies the requirements of the Greenlight initiative and identifies which areas are built -out, therefore, requiring a vote of the people for any amendments. Council Member O'Neil stated that this would include any amendment, regardless of it meeting any of the three thresholds. Mr. Douglas agreed and noted that it would include an amendment for one additional dwelling unit or one additional square foot of non - residential floor area. Per Council Member Glover's request, Mr. Douglas explained that the Greenlight initiative looks back over the previous ten years to all of the amendments approved for a statistical area. He added that Table 3 provides the cumulative total for all amendments over the previous ten years and identifies the six statistical areas that have already exceeded one of the three thresholds. Mr. Douglas further confirmed for Council Member Glover that Old Newport Boulevard is one of the six statistical areas that has • reached a threshold which means that if the Greenlight initiative passes and becomes law, any amendment in the area would require a vote of the people. He added that this would hold true until the cumulative total drops below Volume 53 - Page 509 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • the threshold. 11010ij Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Planning Director Temple that if a project is consistent with the City's existing General Plan and Specific Plan, it would not require an amendment and, therefore, would not be subject to the Greenlight initiative. Mr. Douglas added that many projects come through the City that might require a building permit, a use permit or a zone change, but do not require a general plan amendment. Council Member Ridgeway provided an example of a developer wanting to add square footage beyond what was allowed in the City's General Plan for a development located in the Old Newport Boulevard area and asked what would be required under the Planning Center's cumulative analysis. Mr. Douglas stated that in the situation given, the development would require a general plan amendment and it would require a vote of the people. Council Member Ridgeway further confirmed that there is no minimal threshold and that any addition in square feet would trigger the requirements. Mr. Douglas added that one area that appears to be open to debate is a development with a change in land use that would result in a net decrease in traffic. He stated that he feels that it could be argued that such a development would be exempt from the Greenlight initiative. Council Member Debay provided an example of a development in the lower portion of Bayview Landing that would add 120 units of senior affordable • housing and asked if a vote of the people would be required. Mr. Douglas stated that in the situation given, the development would require a vote of the people because 120 units is greater than the threshold of 100 units. Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that Mr. Douglas go through the general plan amendments in Table 4, Amendments Requiring Voter Approval. He noted that the first one listed is the Old Newport Boulevard Specific Plan. Mr. Douglas stated that the purpose of Table 4 is to look back, apply the requirements of the Greenlight initiative and identify which amendments would have required a vote of the people. Mr. Douglas added that when developing Table 4, he assumed that the Greenlight initiative had been in effect since 1990 but he did not include amendments from the previous ten years. He stated that this was done for simplification purposes. Mayor Pro Tem Adams noted that this resulted in a conservative estimate and that more amendments would most likely have been included if the cumulative total were considered. Mr. Douglas began going through Table 4. He noted that statistical areas A (West Newport), B (West & Central Newport) and C (Lido Isle) would have had no amendments that required a vote of the people. Further, he noted that statistical areas D (Balboa Peninsula), E (Balboa Island), F (Corona del Mar) and G (Promontory Bay) also had no amendments that would have required a vote of the people. Mr. Douglas noted that in statistical area H (Newport Heights), the fast • three amendments listed, West Newport Heights, Bolsa Park and Morgan Development, did not reach the cumulative thresholds. He added, however, that the fourth amendment, Old Newport Boulevard Specific Plan, allowed Volume 53 - Page 510 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • an additional 147 dwelling units, an increase of 50,339 square feet in non- residential floor area and an additional 154 peak hour trips. Mr. Douglas stated that the amendment, without even considering the cumulative totals, would have required a vote of the people. He added, however, that per the provisions of the Greenlight initiative, the amendment would not be counted towards the cumulative total since it did require a vote of the people, in and of itself. Per Council Member Glover's request, Mr. Douglas explained that if an amendment is approved by the City Council and is also approved by the voters, it is not counted in the cumulative summary per the provisions of the Greenlight initiative. Council Member Ridgeway noted that the cumulative summary only looks at the previous ten years, and that the ten year totals will continue to change. Mr. Douglas continued looking at Table 4 and stated that statistical area J (Westcliff/Santa Ana Heights) had no amendments that would have required a vote of the people. He stated that in statistical area K (Eastbay), the Bayview Landing Senior Housing project, with an additional 120 dwelling units, would have required a vote of the people. He stated that in statistical area L (Jamboree/MacArthur), the Newport Village Library Exchange project, with an additional 106 trips, would have required a vote of the people. • Mr. Douglas again noted that the amendments that would have required a vote of the people do not get added to the cumulative total. He pointed out, however, that the amendments that would not have required a vote have 80% of their net increases added to the cumulative totals. Mayor Pro Tern Adams suggested that Mr. Douglas make it clear which projects would have required a vote of the people and, therefore, would have been in jeopardy had the Greenlight initiative been in effect. He stated that the first one would be the Newport Village Library Exchange, which was the entitlement for the Central Library. Mr. Douglas listed another amendment in statistical area L that would have required a vote of the people as being the Fashion Island Expansion, which triggered the floor area and trip thresholds. Council Member Ridgeway asked if there was a simple list of the amendments that would have required a vote of the people. Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that there was, but that the list differs from those listed in Table 4. Council Member Ridgeway suggested that the simple list be looked at first and then the subtle differences could be discussed later. • Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that the differences are not that subtle. He cited an example of the Extended Stay America general plan amendment, which was not included in The Planning Center's list but was included in the Volume 53 - Page 511 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • City Attorney's list. City Attorney Burnham stated that he used The Planning Center's report as well as discussions with Mr. Douglas, Planning Director Temple, City Manager Bludau and Allan Beek to develop a list of the projects that were approved over the previous ten years that would have required a vote of the people. City Attorney Burnham referred to Exhibit B of his report and Table 4 of The Planning Center's report. He stated that he could explain why there were some discrepancies among the numbers. Council Member Debay noted that it could be said that no two people agree when it comes to analyzing the Greenlight initiative. City Attorney Burnham stated that his list includes the Old Newport Boulevard Specific Plan, Newport Landing Senior Housing, Library Exchange, Fashion Island Expansion, Four Seasons Hotel, Pac- Tel/Dahn Mini Storage, Aeronutronic Ford conversion, Fletcher Jones, Temple Bat Yahm, Dahn Mini Storage 11, HEVILennar office building, Pacific Club, Extended Stay America, Pacific View Memorial Park, Harbor Day School and Bonita Canyon Annexation. City Attorney Burnham stated that his list includes sixteen amendments that would have required a vote of the people if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect since November of 1990, while The Planning Center's list includes thirteen amendments. He explained that the differences are because of the assumptions made, and added that his assumptions are listed • in Exhibit B of his report. City Attorney Burnham stated that The Planning Center did not include projects that reduced peak hour trips, which the City had originally advised. He stated that, subsequent to that advice, the City has decided that the Greenlight initiative could be interpreted to require a vote of the people even when a project reduces peak hour trips. City Attorney Burnham cited the Pac- Tel/Dahn Mini Storage project, which reduced peak hour trips by 46, so was not included in The Planning Center's report. He also noted the Aeronutronic Ford conversion, which eliminated 1,331,000 square feet of non - residential floor area and added 500 dwelling units, but reduced peak hour trips by 1145. Lastly, he cited the Extended Stay America project, which tripped the intensity threshold when added to other projects in the statistical area, but reduced peak hour trips by 2248. Council Member O'Neil asked who would be responsible for determining what assumptions and interpretations would be used when deciding if a matter should require a vote of the people. City Attorney Burnham stated that the Greenlight initiative suggests that the City Council adopt guidelines to deal with the questions of interpretations, and that the guidelines be consistent with the intent of the Greenlight initiative. Council Member Glover stated that she has told the City Manager and the City Attorney that they will have to make the interpretations. She stated that the City Council will have to rely on these interpretations and if someone doesn't agree with them, they will have to take the City to court and a judge will have to decide. She stated that she will not allow a group of • citizens to interpret every project. City Attorney Burnham stated that his report also includes a list of the Volume 53 - Page 512 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • statistical areas where 80% of prior amendments would have caused one or more of the thresholds to be exceeded, and lists the same six statistical areas as The Planning Center report. He pointed out, however, that he prepared a chart, Exhibit C in his report, to show that in some statistical areas, one threshold may have been exceeded but there is still room for general plan amendments that would address other thresholds. He cited Pacific View Memorial Park as an example. He stated that a project in the statistical area that did not affect the non - residential floor area threshold could be interpreted as not requiring a vote of the people. Mayor Pro Tem Adams noted that Mr. Beek's list and the City Attorney's list are almost identical, pointing to some agreement on the interpretations. City Attorney Burnham added that the only difference is the inclusion of the Bonita Canyon Annexation project on his list, which he included because he made the assumption that the Greenlight initiative would apply to the City's General Plan only and not the numbers approved by another jurisdiction. Mayor Pro Tem Adams noted that he was astonished to find that the amendments listed in Mr. Beek's table, when added together, result in a net reduction of 1352 peak hour vehicle trips. He added that the City Attorney's list results in a net reduction of 186 trips. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the situation is complex and, referring to the information that Mayor Pro Tem Adams just provided, noted • that the valid goal of the Greenlight initiative proponents to reduce traffic has already taken place naturally by elected officials. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, thanked the City Council for having the analysis done. He stated that it has clarified things that were in doubt and has provided solid numbers to work from. He stated that the report shows that if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect since November 1990, one or two amendments would have required a vote of the people per year. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked Mr. Beek why the Bonita Canyon Annexation was not included in the list he produced. Mr. Beek stated that State law does not allow people to vote on annexations. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if Mr. Beek also found that the amendments on his list represent a net reduction of 1352 peak hour trips. Mr. Beek stated that he had not added the numbers, but he understood that the Aeronutronic conversion resulted in a large reduction. Mayor Pro Tem Adams confirmed with Mr. Beek that amendments that do not increase peak hour trips may require a vote of the people if they exceed the commercial floor area threshold. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the City would have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for fifteen elections to accomplish an overall reduction in traffic. Mr. Beek stated that the City would not have spent that much money if the ballot measures took place during general municipal elections. He added that proponents or opponents would not have spent much money either, since a majority of the items were not controversial. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked why the Greenlight initiative is needed then. Mr. Beek stated that it • is needed as a safety measure. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if Mr. Beek felt that The Irvine Company would have consented to the Bonita Canyon Annexation project and agreement if it may have required a vote of the Volume 53 - Page 513 INDEX • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX people. Mr. Beek stated that he did not feel that it would have needed a vote of the people. Council Member Ridgeway stated that there is an expense to any election process. He stated that it is not fair that a project proponent might possibly have to wait two years for a general municipal election. He stated that the proponent would most likely ask for a special election, which would be expensive. Council Member Glover stated that she does not feel that any of the projects would have happened if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect. She explained that no proponent would want to be put in a position where their project might be tainted by opponents during an election process. She added that it would also divide the community, which is already happening. She questioned if an election would ever take place, since people would prefer to walk away. Council Member Ridgeway agreed and stated that it would have a significant chilling effect on anyone making an application for a project, both from an economic point of view and based on the scrutiny that the proponent would have to go through. Clarence Turner, 1507 Antigua Way, asked if the statistical areas that were not considered built -out were looked at and if it was determined how close • they were to being built -out. He stated that the City Council updated the General Plan in 1988 and many areas were actually downzoned, which could result in minor projects requiring a vote of the people in more statistical areas. Mr. Turner further asked if the projects currently being considered by St. Andrews, Our Lady Queen of Angels and Temple Bat Yahm would require a vote of the people. Planning Director Temple responded by stating that the other statistical areas were also looked at and it was found that statistical area K1 (Newport Dunes) is fast approaching the threshold. She further responded that the project being considered by Our Lady Queen of Angels may or may not require a vote of the people, depending upon on how they do their land transaction. She stated that St. Andrews would probably require a vote of the people, not because of the statistical area it is in but because of the size of the addition. Planning Director Temple stated that Temple Bat Yahm already has an entitlement for an additional 40,000 square feet that has not been constructed yet. Philip Arst expressed his appreciation for the time and money spent on the analysis. He stated that everyone is in close agreement, which is positive news for the Greenlight initiative proponents and has proven that their claims are correct. He also expressed his happiness that the complexity is behind them and that the work is done. Mr. Arst stated that the main points of the program cannot be refuted, as indicated by the withdrawing of several projects over the last several months. He stated that the need for any • special elections would be caused by the greed of the developers and their attempt to overbuild the City. He stated that the Greenlight initiative will provide for a balanced City. He stated that the City did have approximately Volume 53 - Page 514 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • one to two major projects a year, that the City Council then weakened the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and now a dozen projects are before the City. He stated that the Greenlight initiative is already doing its work and is not allowing the City Council to just rubberstamp projects. He cited the Newport Dunes Resort project as an example. Mr. Arst concluded by stating that the analysis has provided a database for all future calculations. He stated that the only motive of the Greenlight initiative proponents is to protect the City's quality of life and preserve property values, not to make huge sums of money by overbuilding the City and increasing traffic congestion. Mayor Noyes stated that although he began by speaking about the facts and numbers that were provided in the analysis, some of Mr. Arst's comments became exaggerated and personal. Mayor Noyes stated that he did not know what twelve projects Mr. Arst was speaking of nor has he ever rubberstamped a project. Council Member Debay asked what the Greenlight initiative will do for the regional traffic impacts on the City. Mr. Arst stated that regional traffic is an issue for the City Council and that they need to work with the neighboring cities. He added that the Greenlight initiative only addresses what the City can control. Council Member Debay pointed out that Coast Highway is a State highway and asked how the City can control its traffic. Mr. Arst stated that the City should control what it can control. He stated • that the City can control the building of high rises in the City. Council Member Debay stated that there are benefits to having office buildings in the City. She added that the views that are being impacted by the Harbor Day School have to be balanced with the generations of children that will benefit from the new gymnasium. Mr. Arst stated that the gymnasium could have been placed in a different location and the residents should have been given a voice. Council Member Debay stated that the City will forever be divided because of the Greenlight initiative. Mr. Arst stated that the Greenlight initiative helps the citizens work more closely with the City Council. Council Member Debay commented on the division created by Mr. Arst's statement that the City Council has rubberstamped projects. Council Member O'Neil stated that he did not know what projects Mr. Arst would be referring to that the City Council has rubberstamped. Council Member O'Neil stated that the City Council goes through a tremendous amount of review, that affected associations are worked with, environmental impact reports are prepared and the Planning Commission hearing process is gone through before a project is then voted on by the City Council. He stated that the Greenlight initiative was created because of changes made to the TPO, which incorporated many of the suggestions of the citizens as well as those done at the advice of the City Attorney. Council Member O'Neil stated that he did not feel that the TPO was weakened, but that a small group of citizens did not feel that they got everything they wanted. He stated that many false assumptions have been made and he doesn't understand what the problem is. Mr. Arst stated that nineteen objections • were made to the TPO and only three were incorporated. Council Member O'Neil disagreed that only three were incorporated. Mr. Arst added that he knew the City Council was following the City Attorney's advice, but he didn't Volume 53 - Page 515 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • understand why some of the other changes were made. Council Member O'Neil stated that the Greenlight initiative, if passed, would have a negative impact on representative government. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the City Council did not weaken the TPO. He disagreed with Mr. Arst's statements that the Greenlight initiative had already turned away projects. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the projects pulled in the Newport Center area were done so because the applicant knew there was no support by the City Council for increased office development in the Fashion Island area. Mayor Pro Tem Adams additionally stated that the Newport Dunes Resort project cannot be touched significantly by the Greenlight initiative. Lastly, Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the citizens already have a voice through their City Council representatives. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the Greenlight proponents had considered what the initiative will do to the process in regards to special interests. He stated that when the issues come before the voters, there will be campaigns waged with unlimited donations received, which will allow for special interest groups to take control of the City. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he can't understand how important land use decisions can be made by campaign statements or one sentence questions on a ballot. Mr. Arst stated that he hopes that an unworthy project would be denied by the City Council. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the referendum process already takes • care of that and the Greenlight initiative puts a preemptive referendum on all major general plan amendments. Mr. Arst stated that the Greenlight initiative only targets the big projects. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated his agreement with Council Member Glover's previous comments that there will be no major projects. He added that the Greenlight initiative takes away from the City's General Plan, which is an essential tool to City government. Mayor Noyes asked if Mr. Arst could name the projects that have been rubberstamped by the City Council and have made him so unhappy. Mr. Arst stated that the Harbor Day School gymnasium would be an example, but that the numbers are very low. Mayor Noyes stated that Mr. Arst is really asking for the City Council to continue doing what it's been doing, proceed with caution and pay particular attention to large projects that result in a high impact. Mayor Noyes stated that he does not want to be blamed for things he is not doing. He pointed out that Jean Watt and Evelyn Hart, proponents of the Greenlight initiative, were also former council members who approved some of the general plan amendments that Mr. Arst is commenting on. Mr. Arst stated that Ms. Watt and Ms. Hart had to adhere to the TPO in its stricter form and that not all projects are bad, but that some mistakes were made. Dolores Otting stated that she can't understand what the City Council is so afraid of and why they are so opposed to a vote of the people. She stated that Fletcher Jones never did bring the money to the City that it was supposed to and she commented about the negative declarations that are • often done instead of environmental impact reports. Ms. Otting stated that the Citv Council is appearing to be attacking the Greenlight initiative proponents, but that the 10,000 people who signed the petition were trying Volume 53 - Page 516 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • to say something. She stated that the City Council used to have Council Committees and that they decided some things shouldn't be done, but that the City is now doing some of those things. She cited the Santa Ana Heights annexation as an example. She stated that it's a different City now and maybe the Council Committees should be brought back to allow for more public input. Ms. Otting also suggested that if additional revenue is so important to the City, the stores in Fashion Island should be open on Saturday and Sunday evenings when the restaurants are still open. Laura Bekeart Dietz, 325 Cameo Shores Road, disagreed with Mr. Arst's comment that the Greenlight initiative gives the residents a voice. She stated that the residents have a voice every day. She stated that they can talk to any Council Member or staff. She stated that the City also expanded the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC) two years ago and its original concept to take into account the interests of the residents in the City. She stated that EQAC has since reviewed some major projects in the City and the public should know that this additional review is being done. Ms. Dietz stated that the current City Council has shown that it is sensitive to all members of the community. Dan Purcell, 3 Canyon Lane, stated that Newport Beach is a great community. He stated that he is a supporter of representative democracy and that it works when educated people are able to make intelligent decisions, but have busy lives and can't follow every issue in depth. He • stated that they, instead, elect people to make reasonable decisions for them. Mr. Purcell stated that direct democracy, on the other hand, requires that all voters be very well educated on all of the issues, which includes attending meetings such as the current one. He stated that this is unreasonable to expect of all voters. He stated that if the Greenlight initiative is approved, the City will be reduced to high dollar campaigns and the wording on a ballot. He concluded by stating that the Greenlight initiative is not the solution. Mayor Noyes stated that the City Council is apt to get a bit resentful when people, such as the Greenlight initiative proponents, state that the City Council is not doing its job. He stated that many people do not know the history of various projects. He provided an example of the representatives from the City that met with The Irvine Company over a period of two and one half years through a committee called the Newport Center Economic Opportunities, but The Irvine Company just walked away in the end because of the hard stand that the City took. Mayor Noyes stated that the City Council is tough on projects, but can do little in regards to regional traffic. Mary Barrett Blake, 777 Domingo Drive, asked what the City is going to do today and tomorrow to preserve the quality of life in Newport Beach. She stated that the traffic on Coast Highway at Dover and Jamboree is getting worse every day. She stated that the Greenlight initiative focuses on the unhappiness of the average person who lives in the City and that it looks at the problem. She added that the City is built -out. She stated that it's not • about one project or pitting neighbor against neighbor, it's about big projects that add lots of traffic trips per day. Volume 53 - Page 517 INDEX • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX Council Member Ridgeway stated that the general plan amendments that were approved over the previous ten years and would have required a vote of the people if the Greenlight initiative had been in effect would have reduced peak hour trips per day. He stated that intensity and density were not looked at, but he is satisfied that the City has been responsive to its citizens. He stated that the City Council is being blamed for regional growth and cited the City of Irvine and Irvine Business Complex's approximately 35 million square feet of office space in the airport area. He noted that these employees drive through the City of Newport Beach and the Greenlight initiative does nothing to address this regional traffic. Ms. Blake stated that the Greenlight initiative is not perfect, but it is a response of the people indicating that they are not happy. Council Member Ridgeway stated that no one is happy with the amount of traffic in the City, but the traffic is not entirely from the City's own citizens. Ms. Blake stated that the Greenlight initiative proponents are asking the City to control what it can control. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he believes it does. Ms. Blake stated that people can't understand why the Newport Dunes Resort project is being considered when one looks at the traffic it will generate. Mayor Pro Tom Adams stated that the City is getting built -out and there is no additional entitlement for high rises in Fashion Island. He stated that Newport Beach has always been inundated by outside traffic and that can't be changed by what is done with various land uses within the City. He stated that Newport Beach is a visitor - accommodating City and the City has • done the best it can to offer a balance. Ms. Blake stated that the problem has been solved in other cities and cited Santa Barbara as an example. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that Santa Barbara is an isolated city. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that a committee has been formed to look at updating the City's General Plan and the process will start soon. He stated that this is where the energy should be spent. He stated that the Greenlight initiative proponents are well meaning, but he doesn't feel the initiative is going to accomplish what people think it will. He stated his hopes that the same energy can be spent on the general plan update because it will truly address the issues. He added that the Greenlight initiative only deals with general plan amendments, which are a small part of the total development in the City. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that a general plan update can look at the City's land use and traffic system, and develop a plan that can carry the City through the next twenty years. Ms. Blake stated that the City Council needs to listen. Mayor Noyes recessed the meeting at 9:50 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:00 p.m. with all members present. Thomas Edwards, 1333 Hampshire Circle, thanked the City for taking the time and effort to conduct the study. He disagreed with some of the generalized conclusions drawn by Mr. Beek earlier in the meeting, and agreed with some of the comments made by council members in that he feels that the Greenlight initiative, if passed, would have a chilling effect. Mr. • Edwards complimented the City Council for the time spent in reviewing documents and reports, talking with staff and meeting with constituents. He stated that the current City Council and previous City Councils have served Volume 53 - Page 518 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • the City well. He stated that Newport Beach has a high rate of participation, has the highest quality of life in Orange County and each and every problem is attacked with vigor. Council Member Glover stated that she is a member of the South Coast Air Quality District, representing the County of Orange, and that Newport Beach enjoys the best air quality of any of the cities in the four counties, which also includes Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside. Council Member O'Neil stated that the same thing can be said for the City's water quality. He stated that Regional Water Quality Control Board has certified the City as one of the cities that looks after its water quality. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that special interest groups already exist for the underground utilities. He stated that these groups are the community associations and as long as they're involved in the voting issue that takes place, there is going to be a problem. Mr. Hildreth stated that he'd like to know more about the general plan update. Mayor Pro Tem Adams explained that the update of the City's General Plan will be a long process. He stated that a committee has been formed and will meet soon to begin the process by mapping out what will take place over the next couple of years, deciding on how the update will be done and how comments will be received from citizens. City Manager Bludau stated that • staff is checking availability with committee members and working on setting the first meeting date. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the meetings will be noticed and open to the public. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the next ninety days should be a good time for the Planning Department to spend time working on the process. Mr. Hildreth asked when the meetings would take place. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he hopes to set the meetings at a convenient time for everyone to attend, possibly towards the end of the workday. He stated that the meetings will be posted pursuant to the Brown Act. City Manager Bludau stated that the postings will occur on the web site, at the library and other regular City posting locations. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he would also announce the meeting times and locations at City Council meetings. City Manager Bludau added that the local newspapers would be notified. Tom Byars, Peninsula resident and Greenlight initiative proponent, stated that the current City Council is taking credit for what happened prior to their appointments. He stated that the City Council is well aware of the conditions on Coast Highway and the projects that are being discussed for the City. He stated that the trust of the City Council is not in question, but he's concerned about what will happen in the future. He stated that the City Council is also represented by the people it appoints, such as those appointed to the Planning Commission. He noted some of the comments made in the • past by Planning Commissioner Selich regarding the Newport Dunes Resort project. Mr. Hyans stated that he has learned a lot about EIR's and much of it is that they are created on boiler plates, resulting in a lot of Volume 53 - Page 519 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • misinformation. He stated that updating the City's General Plan has been discussed for some time and there's always an excuse for not doing it. He also mentioned the Koll and Conexant projects, and the problem with their traffic models. He concluded by stating that it is not that the City Council is not trusted, it's that the citizens aren't sure what decisions will be made. Council Member Ridgeway stated that criticism is difficult, but he feels that through EQAC and increased citizen involvement, the City Council has done a good job of allowing the criticism to surface. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to receive and file, and make copies of the report available to the public and on the City's web site. Susan Caustin stated that it's the traffic. She stated that the Greenlight initiative is not intended to affect regional traffic, it is only intended to deal with what the City does have authority over. She stated that the City's General Plan is only a guideline and is constantly being amended. She stated that the City already has enough traffic. She complained that she called Mayor Pro Tem Adams and he never returned her call. Mayor Pro Tem Adams responded that he attempted to return the can twice. Ms. Caustin stated that she also put a call into another Council Member who did not return her call, but instead she received a call from the City Attorney stating that the call wouldn't be returned since Ms. Caustin was planning to • file a referendum. Council Member Glover responded by stating that the call was not returned because she was told that Ms. Caustin was potentially going to file a lawsuit. Council Member Glover stated that she will not meet with citizens who say they are going to sue the City because she feels it would be inappropriate. Ms. Caustin stated that she never said she was going to sue the City. She stated that the Newport Dunes Resort project was given a negative declaration stating that there would be no environmental impact from the approved 275 -room family inn. She stated that a letter from SPON (Stop Polluting Our Newport) caused the EIR to be done. She added that the traffic study concluded that the current proposal, though larger, would produce less traffic. She asked how Mayor Pro Tem Adams could support that. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he would be happy to meet with Ms. Caustin anytime to discuss the traffic study. Ms. Caustin stated that the issue is traffic and the citizens don't feel they're being listened to. She stated that it is the reason the Greenlight initiative was started. Council Member Glover stated that she was on the Planning Commission for five years, has been on the City Council for six years and that during this time has seen the traffic decrease on Coast Highway. She stated that it decreased significantly during the recession. She stated that recessions will occur again. She stated that when people complain about traffic, they need • to remember some of the alternatives. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Volume 53 - Page 520 INDEX • • • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 21. CERTIFICATION OF THE PETITION ENTITLED "NEWPORT BEACH TRAFFIC PLANNING AND IMPROVEMENTS; TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE" AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION SETTING THE ELECTION DATE. Thomas Edwards, 1333 Hampshire Circle, proponent of the Newport Beach Traffic Planning and Improvements; Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) initiative, requested that the staff- recommended action be approved. He stated that a number of people do think it's time to do something and approximately 10,000 signatures were gathered for the TPO initiative in a short amount of time. He stated that he believes the initiative should be placed on the ballot for the next election. Mr. Edwards stated that the TPO initiative amends the City Charter to deal with traffic, ensures adequate funds for future road improvements, keeps all major intersections in the City operating at 90% or less of capacity, provides effective land use planning in the airport area and deals with all the facets of the City, not just traffic. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, stated that State law does not allow misrepresentation that misleads or deceives voters when collecting signatures for petitions. He stated that the courts will not allow an initiative to be placed on the ballot if the signatures were gathered by misrepresentation. Mr. Beek stated that the TPO initiative signatures were gathered by misrepresentation. He stated that signature circulators stated that the Greenlight initiative proponents sponsored the petition, that it would limit traffic and other false statements. He stated that the TPO initiative's whole purpose is to kill the Greenlight initiative. Mr. Beek commented on some of the flagrant misrepresentations of the circulators. He stated that the measure itself and the notice of intent to circulate petition also contained misrepresentations. He stated that the TPO initiative pretends to protect the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, but the developers who are behind the TPO initiative are actually opposed to the ordinance. Mr. Beek stated that the TPO initiative also violates the single subject rule. He stated that many voters signed the petition because they were deceived. He requested that the City Council have an investigation conducted of the improprieties surrounding the collection of signatures. Council Member Debay stated that the City received 720 postcards from citizens requesting that their signatures be withdrawn from the TPO initiative. She stated that, in reality, only 107 of the citizens had actually signed the petition. Mr. Beek stated that the postcards were worded so that the citizen was only asking to have their name removed if they had signed the petition. Clarence Turner, 1507 Antigua Way, stated that Mr. Beek just made some Volume 53 - Page 521 7!1 D► Res 2000-69 Newport Beach Traffic Planning & Improvements; Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) (39) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • misrepresentations of his own. He added that if anyone feels that the TPO petition was prepared illegally, the proper course of action would be to handle the matter in the courts. Mr. Turner stated that the Greenlight initiative proponents are more frightened by the fact that the TPO initiative does address traffic in the City and will result in improved circulation in the City. He stated that the City cannot fund all of the necessary improvements itself and must rely on Traffic Phasing Ordinance funds, fair share fees, Measure M fees, State sales tax fees, gas tax fees and Federal taxes. Mr. Turner pointed out that, in regards to regional growth, Newport Beach's density per square mile is approximately 4600 people. He compared this statistic with Costa Mesa at 6000, Huntington Beach at 6800 and Irvine at 2700. Mr. Turner stated that the TPO initiative addresses regional traffic and he urged the City Council to place the initiative on the ballot. Dolores Otting stated that she and her husband go to Gelson's, Ralph's or the post office and every day, and they were approached by signature circulators who stated that the initiative was for Greenlight. Ms. Otting stated that she confirmed with Mr. Hyans that the Greenlight initiative had already qualified for the ballot. Later, she again overheard circulators saying that their initiative was for Greenlight. Ms. Otting then confirmed with Mr. Beek that the circulators were lying. She stated that she approached a circulator and he showed her the Greenlight initiative postal address on the back of the TPO initiative. Ms. Otting concluded her comments by stating that the signatures were gathered by fraud, but that • she knows the initiative will be placed on the ballot and people are just going to have to vote. Referring to Ms. Otting's comments that the TPO initiative was only 300 signatures shy of not qualifying for the ballot, Mayor Noyes explained that the County only checks signatures until the number needed to qualify the initiative for the ballot is reached. Bob Caustin read from a letter written by Yvonne Houssels to the City Council, dated July 25, 2000, and stated that it was a reprint of a letter sent to the Daily Pilot. The letter stated that Ms. Houssels felt that she had been coerced and lied to in order to get her signature on the TPO petition. Mr. Caustin stated that he had the same experience at a Vons. Mr. Caustin stated that the TPO initiative is filled with lies. He stated that the allegations need to be investigated. He stated that he and Mr. Beek have spoken to an attorney. Mr. Caustin stated that the Greenlight petition was carried by citizens of Newport Beach and the TPO petition was not. Council Member O'Neil stated that he appreciates the concerns of those that question how the signatures were gathered for the TPO initiative, but that an investigation of the allegations has been made, that the City Attorney has reviewed the law and they have been told that no violations of the law have occurred. Council Member O'Neil reminded Mr. Caustin that the initiative process is retained by the people and is not controlled by the City. He stated that once the signatures have been received by the City Clerk, they are sent • to the County for verification, the City Attorney decides if the process has been legal and the City Council is then obligated to place the initiative on the ballot. He stated that any improprieties or illegal activity need to be Volume 53 - Page 522 INDEX • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 INDEX addressed in a court of law. Mr. Caustin stated that the City Council has the right to investigate the allegations. Georgine Vaught stated that she was one of the people that was asked to sign the petition for Greenlight, when it was actually for the TPO initiative. She stated that the incident occurred at Albertson's on Saturday, June 10, 2000. She requested that all signatures gathered at that location on that date be disqualified. Marianne Towersey, 501 Kings Place, stated that she concurred that the signatures for the TPO initiative were obtained under false pretenses. She stated that a signature collector walked her street and stated that the petition dealt with the expansion of John Wayne Airport. She looked at the collector's talking points and spoke with a neighbor. She requested that the City Council disqualify the signatures gathered in the Cliff Haven area. Jean Beek, 2007 Highland Drive, stated that on Friday, May 19, 2000, she was told by a circulator of the TPO petition that the initiative would stop traffic and help the Greenlight initiative. She stated it occurred again at the same market, but the collector stated that it would stop growth at John Wayne Airport. Jim deBoom, 1815 Sherington Place, stated that a lot of the traffic improvements in the City have occurred because of the Traffic Phasing • Ordinance. He stated that he would guess that the opponents of the TPO initiative are probably the same people that opposed roadway improvements in the past. He stated that one reason for the traffic in the City is the denial of the extension of University Drive that occurred several years ago. Mr. deBoom stated that the TPO initiative continues the process of funding. He stated that Newport Beach has a high number of people who don't pay the same property taxes as their newer neighbors, due to Proposition 13. He added that it is common practice to include wording in an opposing initiative that would make the other initiative invalid if more votes are collected. He stated that the reason the Greenlight initiative was attached to the TPO initiative is because mention of it is made within the text of the TPO initiative. Mr. deBoom stated that he gathered signatures himself for the TPO initiative and observed others doing so. He encouraged the City Council to place the initiative on the November ballot. Philip Arst stated that he has documented proof of the misrepresentation made to solicit signatures for the TPO initiative. He stated that this information has been submitted to the City Clerk. He stated that he also has in writing what the attorney for the TPO initiative said that the collectors were told to say. Mr. Arst stated that the TPO initiative does not make the developers pay. He stated that the Greenlight initiative actually makes the developers pay more. He stated that the TPO initiative does not give the City more control over the land uses in the airport area. Mr. Arst stated that the City Council has the obligation to conduct an investigation and reply to the allegations. He admitted that some voters will vote by the • title. City Attorney Burnham stated that when the letter complaining about Volume 53 - Page 523 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • signature gathering practices was submitted to the City Clerk, his office was consulted. He stated that he reviewed the San Francisco Forty - Niners vs. Nishioka case. He stated that the court ruled that the City Clerk has a mandatory duty to reject a petition when the petition contains objectively false information that could substantially mislead a reasonable voter. He stated that he feels that the City Clerk's duty is to look solely at the petition. He stated that no one condones false signature gathering practices, but the City Clerk can only conduct her analysis based on the petition itself. City Attorney Burnham stated that he also reviewed the talking points of the collectors and did not feel that they were objectively false or designed to mislead the voters. City Clerk Harkless concurred with the comments made by City Attorney Burnham and stated that she has no way of verifying the accusations made. She stated that she can only go by the petition itself. She added that she did receive complaints in her office and spoke with a couple about the right to circulate an initiative and the responsibility of a signer to understand what they are signing. City Attorney Burnham added that the City Clerk also make the determination that the signature withdrawal forms were valid and in conformance with the Elections Code. He stated that this allowed people who felt that their signatures were obtained by misrepresentation the opportunity to correct the error. • Council Member Glover agreed with Council Member O'Neil's previous comments and stated that the initiative process is done throughout the State. She stated that she feels that it is the responsibility of the signer to know what they are signing. She added that using emotional wording is part of the initiative process. Motion by Council Member Glover to approve the certification of the "Newport Beach Traffic Planning and Improvements; Traffic Phasing Ordinance" petition from the Registrar of Voters, County of Orange, as presented by the City Clerk; and adopt Resolution No. 2000 -69 calling and giving notice of the holding of an election for the submission of the proposed charter amendment to be held on November 7, 2000 (consolidated with the County of Orange). Council Member O'Neil stated that based on the advice of the City Attorney and input from the City Clerk, who both performed the functions that they are required to do by the State petition statutes and the City Charter, he feels compelled to place the TPO initiative on the ballot. Mayor Noyes stated that he feels that the City is just trying to be consistent with what was done for the Greenlight initiative. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: • Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Volume 53 - Page 524 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • Absent: None 22. COMMUNICATION FROM LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES — LEAGUE ANNUAL CONFERENCE — SEPTEMBER 7 -9, 2000 IN ANAHEIM. Motion by Mayor Noyes to designate Mayor Noyes as the City's Voting Delegate for the Conference and Council Member Glover as the Voting Alternate. 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 There was a brief discussion about starting a new item past 11:00 p.m. Motion by Council Member Debay to finish the agenda at the current meeting. 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 23. WEB SITE LINKS. City Manager Bludau stated that it was brought to his attention that there is a direct link on the City's web site to the Chamber of Commerce site, which has taken a position on the Greenlight initiative. He stated that the City currently has no policy with regards to links on the City's web site. He stated that there are currently eighteen links and that they are listed in the staff report. He suggested that a policy be developed and stated that the alternatives might include freezing the current web site links, removing the Chamber's link, adding a link for the Greenlight initiative, leaving things as they are, or deciding that no links should be allowed. Council MemberDebay suggested that a disclaimer be added to all of the links to state that the City is not necessarily supporting the opinions expressed. City Manager Bludau stated that he has been told that the Chamber has already added such a disclaimer to their link. Mayor Noyes thanked the Chamber for adding the disclaimer while the City looks at the issue. He stated that there is a lot to learn in the area of links and web sites. • City Attorney Burnham stated that he did find a court case on the subject that occurred in Tennessee. He stated that it involved a local newspaper Volume 53 - Page 525 INDEX League of California Cities (61) Web Site Links (30/69) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • business that had a web site and wanted to link its city's web site to it. He stated that the city did have a web site, and had an informal policy allowing links to their web site for those businesses engaged in promoting the city's economic welfare. He stated that the city disallowed the link with the local newspaper business because the newspaper was critical of the city. City Attorney Burnham stated that the court ruled that web sites are non -public forums, that the city can limit the number of links it approves and that it can establish criteria for the links to the site. He added that if a policy is developed, it must be done in a viewpoint neutral fashion. City Attorney Burnham stated that his recommendation to the City Council would be to either terminate the link with the Chamber or approve a link that offers the counter viewpoint. Council Member O'Neil confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the Tennessee case is not binding in California, but could provide a guideline. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that if competing views are offered, he feels that it puts the City in the position of having to police its links. He stated that it would be an unreasonable burden on the City to monitor the links on a continual basis. Council Member Glover stated that the links the City currently has should be continued and that a City Council committee should be formed to work with staff on a policy and set some criteria. She stated that she agreed with • the practice of some agencies that allow links for long- established entities and disallow links for short -term groups. Motion by Council Member Glover to request that a City Council ad hoc committee be formed to develop a policy that sets criteria for links on the City's web site and request that the Chamber of Commerce link remain as is. Mayor Noyes stated that the issue is very complicated, and mentioned the current links to the Los Angeles Times and the El Toro Airport. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he had previously assumed that the Chamber link was on the City's link page, but he stated that it is instead included on the list of the City's internal links. He stated that he wasn't sure this was appropriate. Mayor Noyes suggested that a disclaimer be added to the City's web site. He stated that the Chamber provides a lot of good information and he doesn't know what other entities would have to be eliminated if the Chamber link were discontinued. Council Member Glover stated her support for adding a disclaimer on the City's web site and agreed to amend her motion to include a request that a disclaimer be added to the City's web site. Council Member Ridgeway agreed that some standards need to be set and • there appear to be some issues that the City can control. He added, however, that there should be a balance offered with the Chamber page. He stated his support for adding a link for the Greenlight initiative viewpoint. He also Volume 53 - Page 526 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • agreed that the disclaimer should be added. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he'd also like to reserve the right to remove the Greenlight initiative link if the City desires to do so. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to request that the Greenlight proponents be allowed a link to the City's web site. Richard Luehrs, PresidentlCEO Newport Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber of Commerce was founded in 1906 and has provided continuous service to the community. He stated that the Chamber receives over 200 phone calls per day from people asking for resources. He stated that the Chamber spends countless hours every month on economic development issues that benefit the City, holds important recognition programs on behalf of the City and executes community enrichment programs. Mr. Luehrs stated that he also wanted to mention the City's web site address, www.city.newport - beach.ca.us. He stated that the general public will type in newportbeach.com, which is the Chamber's web site address. He stated that the Chamber receives about two million hits per month, and just under 50,000 user sessions per month. Mr. Luehrs added that the Chamber's page that covers the Greenlight viewpoint is not the most popular item of interest. He confirmed that the Chamber has already placed a disclaimer on their web site. Mr. Luehrs concluded by stating that the Chamber has had a long and fruitful relationship with the City, but that it may offer an opinion occasionally and they'd like to reserve the right to do so. • Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Mr. Luehrs that the Chamber web site also offers a link to the City's web site. Council Member Debay asked if Mr. Luehrs agreed with the City offering a link to the Greenlight initiative proponents, and she would also suggest the TPO initiative proponents. Mr. Luehrs stated that he did not feel that it would be a fair way of handling the issue. He further clarified that the case in Tennessee that was mentioned earlier by the City Attorney involved links to the city's web site, not links from the city's web site. Philip Arst stated that the Chamber has a free speech right to take any position they want on their web site. He stated, however, that it shouldn't be done at taxpayer expense or under the connotation of the City web site. Mr. Arst stated that the Chamber does get a preferred location on the City's web site and that the link should at least be moved to the Links page. He stated that only three other cities in the County, out of the twenty -seven that have web sites, feature their Chamber on their home page. Mr. Arst concluded by stating that the City should adopt a neutral stand and that the Chamber should be moved from the home page to the Links page. He added that the Greenlight initiative should also be allowed a spot on the home page for a compensating time to level the playing field. He also suggested that, in the future, the City might want to consider a community activities link to provide an open forum. • Doug Stucky, 2501 Via Marina, Pubic Affairs Director, Newport Chamber of Commerce, stated that the case in Tennessee involved people linking to the city's page, and not the city providing links to outside entities. He stated Volume 53 - Page 527 `110117/:1 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • that there are currently six cities in the County that have direct links to their Chambers on their home pages, and over twenty -one that have the link on a Links page. Mr. Stucky stated that the Chamber does a service to the City, but he doesn't understand what service the Greenlight initiative proponents would offer on their link, except for their viewpoint. Tom Hyans, Peninsula resident, stated that the City's web site has two links to the Chamber, one via the direct link and another through the link to the Conference and Visitors Bureau web site, which has a link to the Chamber. Mr. Hyans suggested that a policy should be developed, rather than the mishmash that is taking place at the current meeting. Dan Purcell stated his support for removing the Chamber link until after the November election. He stated that he would not support a purely political entity being offered a link to the City's web site. Mr. Purcell stated that the City's web site address is consistent with other cities in the country. He added that there is no cost to having a link on a web site. Mayor Noyes asked if candidate statements were posted on the City's web site. City Clerk Harkless stated that she will post the list of candidates, their candidate statements, any biographical information and a photo. She added that she will also post the City Attorney's title and summary for any qualified charter amendments, as well as the text and direct arguments. • Laura Bekeart Dietz, 325 Cameo Shores Road, asked that the action taken at the current meeting not affect the web site that the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC) has been working on. Secondly, she stated that the City Council should act in fairness to all of the parties involved. Lastly, Ms. Dietz announced that EQAC would be having both initiatives on their agenda at their meeting of September 18, 2000. Larry Porter, 2712 Cliff Drive, stated that the link with the Chamber is inappropriate because the Chamber's home page is political in nature and addresses issues that the City is considering. He added that the link from the City's web site implies that the City supports the viewpoints. Council Member Ridgeway stated that his motion was made out of a sense of fairness. He stated that his motion was to add a link for the Greenlight initiative proponents. He also felt that it wasn't appropriate to eliminate the link with the Chamber. He stated that fairness can be reached by allowing a link to the Greenlight initiative web site, or mentioning the web site as an opposing viewpoint. Council Member Ridgeway's motion died for lack of a second. Council Member Glover stated that her motion included adding a disclaimer to the City's web site for all links. She added that a policy also needs to be established. • Mayor Noyes suggested that possibly the two motions could be combined. He stated that if the City Council is going to err, it should err on the side of open communication. Mayor Noyes suggested that the motion include the Volume 53 - Page 528 110 11 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 • disclaimer, adding the Greenlight initiative web site and forming a committee to develop a policy. Council Member Debay stated that she agrees with the suggestions if the TPO initiative is also allowed a link. Mayor Noyes agreed and stated that there are eight other political action committees (PACs) that should also be considered. Council Member Debay stated that the TPO initiative proponents should be allowed the same exposure as the Greenlight initiative proponents. Council Member Ridgeway agreed that it should be added to Council Member Glover's motion. Mayor Noyes suggested that the initiative links only be allowed through the election. City Manager Bludau additionally suggested that other links be frozen until a Council- approved policy is in place. Mayor Pro Tem Adams clarified that the motion was to leave the Chamber link in its current location and place the additional links on the Links page. • Council Member Glover agreed to include the amendments to her motion. The motion by Council Member Glover to request that a City Council ad hoc committee be formed to develop a policy that sets criteria for links on the City's web site; request that a disclaimer be added to the City's web site; request that the Chamber of Commerce link remain as is; request that the Greenlight proponents and the TPO proponents be allowed on the Links page through November 7, 2000; and to "freeze" other links to the web page until a Council- approved policy is in place carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 24. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 2804 BROAD STREET, NEWPORT HEIGHTS (N2000 -240). Public Works Director Webb stated that a brick wall was constructed within the public right -of -way without an encroachment permit and that it does not meet the various policies of the City Council. He stated that staffs recommendation is to deny the appeal of the applicant and require that the • wall be removed from the public right -of -way. He stated that if the City Council would prefer that the wall be allowed to remain, staff would like to recommend some conditions. Volume 53 - Page 529 .IQ RYDR EPN2000 -240 2804 Broad Street (65) • • • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes July 25, 2000 Council Member Glover stated that the street was recently changed to avoid encroachments such as the one before the City Council at the current meeting. Motion by Council Member Glover to deny the request. Kelly Sandore, 430 Redlands Avenue, began by stating that the City is the perfect size and that City staff is great to work with. He stated that the encroachment does not follow City policy. He agreed that the problem is public right -of -way and he doesn't support any structure on public right -of- way. He stated that the neighborhood does not have streetlights or sidewalks, and any encroachments are a hazard. 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 FOR RECONSIDERATION - None. ADJOURNMENT - 11:50 p.m. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on July 19, 2000, at 3:15 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. C�°dyyko-m. 4, &, City Clerk Volume 53 - Page 530 INDEX