HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/10/2000 - Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX
— 5:00 p.m. [Refer to separate minutes]
CLOSED SESSION - 6:15 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - See City Attorney Burnham's
announcement below.
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 Ridgeway.
Invocation by Reverend Tim McCalmont, Presbyterian Church of the
Covenant.
Proclamation declaring October 15 - 21, 2000 as 'Teen Read Week%
CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL
MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR
DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEMI:
Council Member O'Neil stated that he attended the candidate forum at the
Oasis Senior Center and was disturbed by comments made regarding the
lack of direction by the current Council. He commended Council Member
Thomson for attempting to correct the record. He reported that this Council
is united, professional, works hard on the residents' behalf, and is under
Mayor Noyes' excellent leadership who works with the City Manager and
staff. He noted that the City has the best municipal services in its history.
He expressed the opinion that the candidates are probably not aware of what
Council is all about and expressed concern that doubt has been raised by the
candidates. He stated that a great deal of time is spent to determine
whether the City will be engaged in a number of projects to protect the
quality of life, but the candidates seem to believe that Council is rubber
stamping development projects that will adversely impact the City's quality
of life. He reported that the City has a plan to annex Newport Coast and
Santa Ana Heights which will provide an ongoing revenue stream for the
City and its residents; has a plan to protect and take care of the water
quality in the Bay and ocean; and has a plan to try to extend the John
Wayne Airport (JWA) settlement agreement. Further, Council has approved
the most major public works developments in the City which involve the
widening of MacArthur Boulevard and constructing the new Arches Bridge.
He added that Council brings a balanced budget to the community every
Volume 53 - Page 628
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
INDEX
year and Newport Beach is the only city in which the residents receive free
refuse pick -up as part of the property tax. He assured everyone that they
live in the best city there is in the County and possibly the nation, and that
their elected representatives will continue to work hard on the citizens'
behalf with honor, dignity, resolve, and prudent, responsible decision
making. He emphasized that the actions that Council has taken or will take
in the future will enhance the quality of life and continue to help increase
the property values.
Council Member Ridgeway stated that he also feels the unfounded criticisms
being made about this Council. He expressed the opinion that the citizens of
the community seem to be intolerant and materialistic. He reported that
this country, after World War II and the 1950's, was built on mutual help
and was very tolerant. He believed that people should start being more
tolerant, helpful, and constructive, rather than carry the "Not in My
Backyard" attitude. He expressed the opinion that the divisiveness in the
City is unfortunate and that Council seems to be the object of this
divisiveness. He stated that he is fighting to make this a better City and
requested a little more cooperation and help from everybody.
City Attorney Burnham announced that, during Closed Session,
Council unanimously authorized an agreement that gives the City
the right to purchase the Caltrans West parcel. He reported that the
initial term of the option agreement is for 12 months and that the
City has the right to extend the term for another 6 months. Further,
the City will pay Caltrans 5% of the purchase price which is about
$4.2 million for the initial term and another 5% if there is a need to
extend the option.
Council Member Debay reported that this has been an issue she campaigned
on 8 years ago. She noted that this may have taken awhile but the City was
dealing with the State, it was in a recession, and the reserves were low. She
expressed her gratefulness toward staff and Council for this purchase. She
explained that the Caltrans West parcel or "Sunset Ridge Park ", as renamed
by West Newport residents, consists of 12 to 15 acres and contains a flat
portion that can become an active park.
Council Member Thomson thanked Council Member O'Neil for his comment
and stated that he endorses Council Member O'Neil's viewpoints about the
debate and how well Council is working together.
City Clerk Harkless announced that today is the last day to register or re-
register for the November 7 election. She stated that her office will be
remaining in the Council Chambers until 10 p.m. to register people to vote.
If someone misses the 10 p.m. deadline, she reported that the County
Registrar of Voters office, located at 1300 South Grand Avenue in Santa
Ana, will remain open until midnight.
CONSENT CALENDAR
READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
1. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2000.
Volume 53 - Page 629
a
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
Waive reading
minutes, approve as written and order filed.
2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND
full of all ordinances and resolutions
Clerk to read by title only.
RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in
under consideration, and direct City
3. ADOPTION OF TAXICAB REGULATION REVISIONS REGARDING
TAXICAB RATES AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS ADMINISTERED
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY TAXICAB ADMINISTRATION
PROGRAM. Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -86 regarding taxicab rates and
requirements.
ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION
4. ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 3.33 TO THE NEWPORT BEACH
MUNICIPAL CODE ENACTING AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURAL CHAPTER. 1) Introduce Ordinance
No. 2000 -17 adding Chapter 3.33 to the NBMC giving the City authority to
assess leased property; and 2) schedule for adoption at the October 24th City
Council meeting.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
5. Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway.
6. GRANT HOWALD ATHLETIC FIELD REHABILITATION (C -3252) -
COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the
City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; 3) authorize the City Clerk to
release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion
has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code;
and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond one year after Council
acceptance.
PREPARATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
BALBOA VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - APPROVAL OF
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. Approve a Professional
Services Agreement with J.H. Douglas & Associates for Environmental and
Coastal Permit preparation and processing in conjunction with the Balboa
Village project (approval recognizes that this firm has a former City
employee in their employ).
MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS
8. Removed at the request of Council Member Debay.
9. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -006) - APPRAISAL OF COMMERCIAL
TIDELANDS USES. 1) Accept the proposal submitted by George Hamilton
Jones, Inc. for an appraisal to establish an annual permit fee and lease fee
for commercial use of City tidelands; and 2) approve a budget amendment
(BA -006) in the amount of $55,000 to fund the appraisal.
Volume 53 - Page 630
M l 113
Res 2000 -86
OCTAP
Taxicab Rates
(27)
Ord 2000 -17
Assessment
District
Alternative
Procedures
(89)
C -3252
Grant Howald
Athletic Field
Rehabilitation
(38)
C -3379
Balboa Village
Improvement
Project
(38)
BA -006
Commercial
Tidelands
Uses
(40/51)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to approve the Consent Calenda
except for the items removed (5 and 8).
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
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
5. AGREEMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF INTERNET
COMPUTER VIDEO EQUIPMENT AT NEWPORT BEACH
LIFEGUARD HEADQUARTERS (contd. from 8/8/00, 8/22/00, 9/12/00 &
9/26/00).
Council Member Ridgeway reported that this item was discussed at a
previous meeting and the topics of whether the City should have an
economic interest and have other people compete for this contract were
raised. He stated that staff asked for alternate bids based on economic
return and only one entity, who was non - responsive, made a competing bid.
He noted that the City is back to the original issue of safety which was the
original intent of providing internet cameras at strategic points so that the
lifeguard headquarters can control the cameras and observe surf conditions.
Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to approve the agreement.
Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that he assumes the City will
allow him to put up a surveillance camera to watch Residential Pier (RP)
80100011 since it is allowing video cameras throughout the City. He
indicated that vandalism has occurred at RP80100011.
Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if it was Mr. Hildreth's intention to erect a
camera on public property. Mr. Hildreth stated that he wants to erect a
camera on private property to watch over public property since the City
removed his private property and assumes that he will have liability over
public property. He indicated that he needs to save himself from litigation.
Council Member Ridgeway reported that the cameras are only going to be
placed on a few of the lifeguard stations to watch the surf. He noted that
these types of cameras are already being placed on private property and are
hooked up to the internet. He emphasized that the cameras are providing
safety for the citizens and visitors.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Volume 53 - Page 631
INDEX
C -3363
Lifeguard Video
Equipment
(38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
INDEX
8. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 5, 2000. Planning
(68)
Council Member Debay reported that the Planning Commission voted to
initiate amendments to the General Plan. She noted that Item 6 deals with
4343 Von Kerman Avenue (Koll Development Company) for the addition of a
lobby to an office building that totals 2,160 square feet and One Upper
Newport Plaza (0 Hill Partners) for an addition to an existing building for a
file storage room that totals 440 square feet. She stated that it was her
understanding that, with regard to the Greenlight initiative (Measure S),
Newport Center is built out and is one of six zones that are built out.
Planning Director Temple clarified that there are six statistical divisions
that are built out and that the projects Council Member Debay is referring to
is located in the airport planning area which is built out. She stated that
these General Plan Amendments will be on the October 24 Council agenda
for actual initiation; the applicants will need to submit any related
applications; and then they will go to public hearing before both the
Planning Commission and Council. She indicated that she does not believe
that all the steps will be done before the November 7 election.
Ms. Temple confirmed for Council Member Debay that the Koll Development
Company and 0 Hill Partners projects will end up on a ballot if Measure S
passes. Council Member Debay pointed out the square footage of each of the
projects and noted that the applicants would not be able to proceed on these
small additions until the projects are placed on a ballot for a vote.
Motion by Council Member Debav to receive and file.
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
• Bart Hackley, speaking on behalf of the Balboa Performing Arts Theater
Foundation, announced that the Foundation is putting on a 5K run/walk on
October 28 at 8:00 a.m. He stated that people can call 673 -0895 for an
application and thanked Harbor Inspector Armand for his support.
• Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, utilized photos of RP80100011 before
and after the City took control of the mooring. He believed that the City has
neglected the ability for public input and possibly put the people of the City
at risk. He stated that he spoke with Terrance Green who sees this as being
questionable. He also showed the non - conforming trash container labels
being used to help the employees, but believed that the City is not putting
residents and the general public in the same realm because of what they
have done to RP80100011.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. 2000 ANNUAL WEED AND OTHER NUISANCES ABATEMENT. Res 2000 -87
Volume 53 - Page 632
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
Fire Marshall Lockard reported that the City abated two of 120 properties
that were inspected this year. He indicated that the resolution will allow
them to assess for the abatement charges.
In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Lockard indicated
that the City previously placed liens on properties but is now using every
method available in modern business practices to collect the money.
Motion by Council Member Rideeway to confirm the assessment of
charges for properties cleaned by the City and adopted Resolution No. 2000-
87 confirming the weed abatement costs to be assessed to property owners.
Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing
Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, asked if the City warns people before
collecting fees. Mr. Lockard indicated that their process entails that they
make an inspection, verify that a hazard exists, send a written notice to the
property owner, send a second written notice, and then post a notice on the
property. He stated that the property owners have generally contacted the
City and requested that it take care of the abatement if they are unable.
Mr. Lockard confirmed for Council Member Debay that the property owners
asked the City to abate the weeds and fire hazards. He added that some
residents annually call the City to abate their property since they do not live
in the City. City Manager Bludau stated that only having two properties in
the entire City is an outstanding outcome.
There being no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing.
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
11. NATURAL NAILS, 615 EAST BALBOA AVENUE - REQUEST TO
APPROVE A WAIVER OF THE OFF -STREET PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR A PERSONAL SERVICE NAIL SALON USE
ON A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SP -6 (RSC) DISTRICT [A
WAIVER OF SIX (6) PARKING SPACES] (Pam Ward, applicant).
Council Member Ridgeway reported that there are currently 40 vacancies in
Balboa Village, about 600 parking spaces in the Balboa Pier parking lot
almost immediately adjacent to the property, and about 200 public parking
spots and public on- street parking spaces very close to the property. He
believed that this use is more of a neighborhood use and that the Planning
Commission's decision was inappropriate.
Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing.
Marcia Dossey, Property Asset Manager, stated that she felt the use was
good for Balboa Village when she put the tenant in the location since it
Volume 53 - Page 633
INDEX
(41)
UP 3682
Natural Nails
615 East Balboa
(88)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
would serve residents more than visitors. She noted that the property was
developed as a mixed -use property with residents living above. She reported
that each residential property has a tandem parking space that holds two
vehicles and the commercial property is allotted three parking spaces. She
indicated that the building has a couple of vacancies which leaves six
parking spaces, there are three on- street parking spaces in front of the
building, and there are several public parking spaces near the facility.
Ms. Dossey explained that they did not think there would be a need for
additional parking since most residents walk or ride their bikes in the area.
She added that viable villages are maintained by residents and are enhanced
by visitors. She also reported that City staff reported at the Planning
Commission meeting that there are only 10 days of the year in which no
spaces are available in the area.
There being no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to overrule the Planning
Commission and approve Use Permit No. 3682, subject to the Findings and
Conditions contained in Exhibit "A" of the staff report.
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
12. GPA 99 -3(C), ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 902 (PC NOS. 52 AND 53),
AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 14: REVIEW OF A
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PREZONING, AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NECESSARY TO PROVIDE FOR
ANNEXATION OF THE NEWPORT COAST/RIDGE AREA TO THE
CITY.
u�N
Consultant Larry Lawrence reported that Council passed a resolution last
year that initiated annexation proceedings for the Newport Coast/Ridge
area. Accordingly, staff initiated the necessary General Plan Amendment
and pre - zoning actions to provide land use designations and development
standards that would become effective upon annexation. He reported that
the proposed annexation area encompasses 5,441 acres, is located at the
southeastern boundary of the City between the ocean and the San Joaquin
Hills Transportation Corridor, and is within the City's sphere of influence.
Referencing the vicinity map included in the staff report, he noted that the
annexation also includes the northwesterly portion of the Newport Coast
Planned Community which takes up the coastal zone portion of the
annexation. Further, the overall Local Coast Plan (LCP) area extends to
Laguna Canyon Road. Mr. Lawrence noted that the Newport Ridge Planned
Community (PC) is just outside of the coastal zone and north of the Newport
Coast Planned Community. He added that the "residual area" is north of the
San Joaquin Corridor and consists of open space and the new Stage Hill
Private Preparatory School.
Volume 53 - Page 634
Res 2000 -88
Ord 2000 -18
Ord 2000 -19
GPA 99 -3(C)/
PCA 902/
C•3382
Development
Agreement 14/
Newport Coast/
Ridge Area
Annexation
(21/38/45)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
Mr. Lawrence indicated that the strategy Deputy City Manager Kiff will
detail describes a pre- annexation process that will 1) adopt the existing
County- approved land use plans and zoning for the development area as
embodied in the Newport Coast LCP and the Newport Ridge PC documents;
2) adopt a conventional General Plan and zoning designation for the residual
area which are consistent with the existing County designation; and 3) adopt
a development agreement (DA) with The Irvine Company (TIC) to maintain
present development entitlements and open space requirements, and a joint
powers agreement with the County which retains County jurisdiction over
land use and development within the annexation. He explained that the
purpose of keeping the land use jurisdiction with the County after
annexation is to ensure that development of the area and the dedication of
valuable habitat area is administered by County staff who is already familiar
with the provisions of the LCP document, PC document, and conditions of
development approval that is consistent with the complex plans that are a
result of years of planning and environmental analysis.
Mr. Lawrence reported that the Planning Commission reviewed the
annexation process last month and recommends Council approval subject to
clarification of the draft DA which clearly states that the City has
discretionary approval over any future General Plan Amendments in the
area and the addition of more specific land use designations in the Land Use
Element exhibit of the General Plan Amendment.
In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Deputy City Manager
Kiff reported that over 70% of the overall 5,441 acres is dedicated to open
space and habitat.
Regarding Development Agreement No. 14, Deputy City Manager Kiff
reported that:
1) the parties involved include the City, TIC, and
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Development Company (ICDC);
allows TIC its full entitlement as it exists today;
the Irvine Community
obligates TIC not to "oppose" nor "interfere with" annexation before
project completion and then "support" the annexation at project
completion;
directs that entitlement processing of residential properties be with the
County of Orange until a certificate of occupancy has been issued and
the lot has been sold to the ultimate user for at least one year;
directs that entitlement processing for non - residential properties be with
the County until the parcel is "fully improved and occupied... ";
allows the City to annex in one proceeding or phases;
requires the City to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the
County to process entitlements;
requires the City to okay changes to development approvals unless
changes:
• are inconsistent with the Land Use Element designations adopted in
the zoning Amendment and GPA (anticipated on October 24, 2000);
• reduces open space;
• alters the cost of providing services;
• reduces the revenue stream for services; or
• increases density /intensity of the project as a whole, resulting in
Volume 53 - Page 635
INDEX
A
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
unacceptable intersection impacts that cannot be mitigated per the
Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO);
9) requires the City to "cooperate in the formation" of special financing
districts at no cost to City;
10) requires an annual compliance review by the City and TIC/ICDC; and
11) terminates 15 years after the effective date of the annexation.
Regarding No. 3, Mr. Kiff indicated for Council Member O'Neil that they
hope the annexation will be completed before the project is completed,
annexation will probably occur in six to eight months, and build out of
Newport Coast is several years away.
In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Kiff confirmed that
a property owner will be dealing with the City on discretionary actions if a
residential property is completed, has a notice of completion, and a year
lapses. Regarding non - residential uses, Council Member Ridgeway asked
whether the City will not be granted jurisdiction over a shopping center if
one pad is left undeveloped. City Attorney Burnham indicated that the JPA
requires that the entire parcel be fully developed prior to transferring land
use jurisdiction. He pointed out that the JPA is in draft form and that there
is some work to be done to it with TIC and the County. He indicated that it
would still need to go before Council and the Board of Supervisors for
approval. Mr. Burnham clarified that the JPA, in combination with an
ordinance that would grant land use jurisdiction to the County upon
annexation, allows the County to continue processing the development plan
which is a product of over 20 years of planning and environmental analysis.
Further, a way to ensure that the County is able to implement that plan and
provide for the dedication of open space is to enter into a JPA that will give
the County essentially the same responsibilities that the City normally has
over property within the City.
Council Member Ridgeway asked what getting jurisdiction means if No. 8
happens. Mr. Burnham explained that the City has the ability to oppose and
prevent any changes to the development plan that would adversely affect the
City. He stated that pre - annexation and the DA gives TIC the right to
develop their property in accordance to the approvals that have been
established to date, but does not allow them to change the development
entitlement or plan in ways that adversely affect the City.
INDEX
In response to Council Member O'Neil's question, Mr. Kiff confirmed that,
even if land use jurisdiction is deferred sometime into the future, the
revenue from a project will start flowing into the City upon certification of
annexation.
Regarding Council Member Ridgeway's non - residential property scenario,
Mr. Kiff confirmed for Council Member Glover that the City will receive
revenue from the other businesses that are operating in the shopping center
and the DA sunsets 15 years after the date of annexation. Mr. Burnham
indicated that the JPA will terminate upon completion of all development
authorized by the LCP and the PC, which is anticipated in about six to eight
years. He clarified that the JPA is with the County of Orange but, as
development is completed in Newport Ridge and one year lapses from the
date on which a particular area is fully developed, the City will obtain full
Volume 53 - Page 636
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
18013ij
land use jurisdiction over those areas as they
Council Member Ridgeway noted that the applicant will currently continue
to pay filing fees to the County and the City will not receive any fees during
this time, even though the City will be reviewing every application that
comes to the County. Mr. Burnham confirmed that a notice will be provided
to the City as these applications go to the County, but no fee is being
contemplated to be paid to the City. He indicated that there have been
extensive discussions about the exchange of information so that when
development is complete, the Building and Fire Departments have all the
information that they would normally have if the City processed the
applications. Mr. Kiff added that the City would immediately handle the
processing of homes that are completed today. Further, modifications would
also come to the City along with the related fees.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' question, Mr. Burnham indicated that
responsibilities and obligations are assigned between the County and City in
the JPA, not the DA. He stated that , according to the DA, TIC's support of
the City's annexation of Newport Coast/Ridge in its entirety prior to
completion of all development is contingent on the execution of the JPA that
ensures the continuity of processing. He clarified that the DA happens first
and the JPA will follow closely behind it.
Noting that the ordinances will have its second readings at the next Council
meeting, Council Member O'Neil pointed out that a boiler plate notice
provision was left out of the ordinances. He added that it would also be
important for Council to receive a full set of DA exhibits so that they have
the full document by the time the ordinances are adopted.
In response to Council Member Thomson's questions regarding the
maintenance of the slopes within the annexed area, Mr. Kiff indicated that
the City would take over some of the slope maintenance located outside the
gates and are currently maintained by the master homeowners association.
However, the City will not take responsibility for the slopes in the Natural
Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), which is a structure that the
County set up with the State that authorizes that open space be set aside
and preserved. This would remain the obligation of the County. Regarding
drainage, Mr. Kiff stated that the City conducted a review of the
infrastructure and storm drain system about three years ago which
concluded that the storm drains were adequate; however, he indicated that
this is something the City could look at again.
Council Member Debay asked if everything becomes the jurisdiction of the
City by 2015, even if one of the hotel sites is not built. Mr. Burnham stated
that the term of the DA is 15 years and, in the City's view, is the time that
TIC's development rights would be vested. However, he reported that TIC
hopes that all the entitlements will be completed within six to eight years.
Mr. Kiff clarified that the 15 year deadline starts on the effective date of the
annexation which is anticipated to be July 1, 2001; therefore, the DA would
expire in 2016.
Prior to the second reading of the ordinances, Council Member Glover
recommended that outside consultants and land use attorneys review the
Volume 53 - Page 637
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
documentation
Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing.
Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that this action seems to be
stemming around money and asked how much this is costing the City.
Tim Paone, Vice President of Entitlements for The Irvine Company, stated
that TIC appreciates all the work that staff has done and indicated that the
DA reflects the issues and concerns they have raised. He added that they
look forward to moving forward with this process.
Council Member O'Neil stated that he and Mr. Paone have known each other
for many years and congratulated him on his new career move.
There being no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member O'Neil to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -88
approving the General Plan Amendment 99 -3(C); introduce Ordinance
No. 2000 -18 approving Zoning Amendment No. 902 (PC Nos. 52 and 53);
introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -19 approving Development Agreement No. 14
with the addition of a notice provision, that staff will provide Council with
copies of the development agreement exhibits, and make other minor
corrections; pass the ordinances to second reading on October 24, 2000; and
direct staff to pursue a joint powers agreement or similar arrangement for
delegation of land use authority to the County as described in this report.
Regarding the motion's wording "or similar arrangement," Mayor Pro Tem
Adams asked why the City would not be able to pursue the JPA. Following
discussion, Council Member O'Neil amended his motion to remove the
wording.
Discussion ensued relative to whether other consultants or land use
attorneys should review the documentation further since many attorneys
have already reviewed this over the years. It was determined that this was
unnecessary since Mr. Burnham is also a land use attorney and is
comfortable with how the DA is currently drafted.
The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote
Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
I hU] DkI
13. MARINERS MILE STRATEGIC VISION AND DESIGN FRAMEWORK
- AMENDMENT NO. 906.
Assistant City Manager Wood reported that the Strategic Vision and Design
Framework was presented to Council during a study session in June by
Keenan Smith. She indicated that the newer items are the two zoning
amendments that were recommended by the Planning Commission and staff
to give the City some implementation authority so that policy can be taken
Volume 53 - Page 638
Res 2000 -89
Ord 2000 -20
PCA 906/
Mariners Mile
Strategic Vision &
Design Framework
(94)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
INDEX
from the Strategic Vision and Design Framework and put into an ordinance.
She explained that there are two zoning amendments because they are
proposing to amend the specific plan that covers a portion of the area and
establish an overlay district for the remainder of Mariner's Mile, between
Rocky Point and Dover, which is not covered by the specific plan. She stated
that the amendments create a development plan review process so that all
new development can be reviewed for consistency with the design framework
and establishes new criteria that are mandatory for new projects. She
indicated that the committee, the consultant team, and the Planning
Commission thought that sign, landscaping, fencing, and lighting standards
were the most important things brought out of the design framework and
noted that there are no proposed changes to the building regulations. She
reviewed the recommendation and added that suggested language was given
to Council that deals with planting standards for palm trees and wall signs.
Additionally, the City Attorney suggested additional language regarding
trees that would clarify that the "18 feet on center" standard would be the
minimum number of trees and that clustering trees is an alternative as long
as the number is maintained. Ms. Wood stated that this has been an
interesting process because of the amount of public input throughout its
course. She reported that they started with a business and citizens advisory
committee and then a business owners committee which basically set sign
standards for themselves.
Council Member Glover stated that this started several years ago, many
publicly noticed meetings were conducted, and very good input was received
at the Planning Commission meetings. She emphasized that the proposed
plan does not request any funding from the City. She added that the plan is
unusual because the business owners are willing to make the improvements
if there is a 25% or 2,000 square foot increase in the gross floor area,
whichever is less. Council Member Glover commended the business owners
for the many hours they spent on this and stated that they tried to make
everyone aware of the plan. She also commended Ms. Wood for the time she
spent driving community members to other cities to observe what they are
doing in the same type of areas. She indicated that the City has an excellent
architect and landscape architect, and expressed her appreciation to Council
for providing funding so that the City could work with them.
Council Member Ridgeway asked if the design framework is endorsing one
tree for every four parking stalls within a field of parking. He indicated that
this is a standard he is familiar with for office buildings, not commercial -
retail. Consultant Lee Anne Kirby stated that this is standard in several
cities in Orange County. Council Member Ridgeway indicated that he likes
trees, but believed that one tree for every four stalls is very dense and can
become a dangerous situation in a field of parking. Ms. Kirby indicated that
one of the goals is to have the parking lot strained from the view of the
residents living above the commercial areas and that the residents are
supportive of this concept. She reported that, the way the design framework
is written, it allows landscaping to happen without impacting the parking
count. She added that this is also a benefit since the trees will reduce heat
gain in the parking field. Council Member Ridgeway stated that visual sight
lines are very important in fields of parking, there are very minimal trees in
the parking fields already, and there will need to be light standards that are
usually higher than the tree. He indicated that he can support this, but
Volume 53 - Page 639
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
believed that applicants will be requesting waivers to this standard and
questioned why this standard should be established if waivers will be
requested time and again.
Council Member Glover pointed out that Mariner's Mile has very few
medians. Ms. Kirby added that Mariner's Mile is an example of a district
with no parking lot tree requirements, lots of asphalt with no relief to the
asphalt, and an area that has not become a visually nice place. She
emphasized that the goal of the design framework is to make Mariner's Mile
better. Council Member Ridgeway noted that Mariner's Mile will still have
the boat areas and car dealerships which create vast areas of asphalt.
Ms. Kirby agreed, but added that this is more reason to have one tree for
every four parking stalls since the boat areas and car dealerships will still be
asphalt with no requirement for landscaping.
Ms. Wood confirmed that the resolution is adopting the design framework.
Regarding Page 35, Item 2.58 of the design framework, Council Member
Ridgeway noted that it discourages the widening of Pacific Coast Highway
(PCH) through Mariner's Mile. Ms. Wood reported that the design
framework does not prohibit the City from widening PCH through Mariner's
Mile, especially since the widening is part of the Circulation Element. She
explained that the design framework is saying that the widening of this
portion of PCH should not be the City's first choice and that the City should
explore all regional alternatives before this is done.
Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing.
Wesley Taylor, 2001 Sabrina Terrace, stated that he is representing
Theodore "Bob" Robbins, Jr. who is the General Partner of Robbins
Properties. He indicated that Mr. Robbins called him yesterday about a
notice he received and questioned what was happening. He stated that
Mr. Robbins was pleased to know that improvement plans are underway, but
wanted to know exactly what was happening prior to anything being passed
and requested material on the plan. Council Member Ridgeway provided
Mr. Taylor with his staff report. Mayor Noyes indicated that he or
Mr. Robbins can also contact Ms. Wood for more information.
Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that a lot of work has been done
on 17th Street and asked if work will be occurring on PCH since there is
already a great deal of traffic in that area. He believed that the City
apparently has plans to overdevelop the City and stated that he would be
discouraging people to the City just to slow down the traffic. He expressed
the opinion that there is no room to expand PCH because of the bluff.
INDEX
Jim Johnson indicated that this is the first time he received a notice on this.
He stated that he has lived on Cliff Drive, above a two -story office building,
since 1992. He reported that the property owner below him has parked a 50
to 60 foot boat in the parking lot and has even repaired and painted the boat
in the parking lot because he has had a variance for many years. He pointed
out that the Olympic Sales Yard next to the property does not work on boats,
but the property owner is permitted to do this. He stated that he owns a
shopping building in Irvine and Irvine does not allow this type of use. He
added that he moved to Newport Beach thinking they have the same kind of
Volume 53 - Page 640
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
INDEX
standards. He recommended that, while this is still being reviewed, the City
look at some of the existing situations. He believed that this situation is
ruining his property value and asked the City to change this. Mayor Noyes
suggested that he provide Ms. Wood with his telephone number so that she
can follow up on his concerns.
Ted Bean, Co -Chair of the Mariner's Mile Business Owners Association,
stated that they have worked diligently over the last two years on the
strategic plan. He indicated that the plan was thorough and includes
continuum landscaping, lighting, and signage regulations. He encouraged
Council to consider adopting the resolution tonight because it will give them
the ability to move forward in improving Mariner's Mile.
Regarding Council Member Ridgeway's previous comments, Dan Purcell,
508 Poinsettia, asked when the City became tree - haters. He believed that
adding trees in the area is a great idea. He stated that smaller trees were
replanted in Corona del Mar because the older trees raised the sidewalks.
He expressed the opinion that that the former trees were so valuable to the
area and everyone loved them.
Ted Robinson, 205 Villa Lido Soud, stated that he owns the Larson Shipyard
and that he did not receive any public notices either. He indicated that he
agrees with Council Member Ridgeway with regard to the amount of trees in
that area, even though he has planted more king and queen palm trees on
his property than anyone on Mariner's Mile, and reported that the fan palm
trees the City is recommending will end up looking like poles. He expressed
the opinion that the City may run the risk of sterilizing the area since it is a
waterfront, not an office complex, and that the atmosphere should stay a
little funky and match the waterfront theme. He suggested that the area not
be called "Mariner's Mile" but "The Waterfront."
Mark Moreau, 2439 West Coast Highway, Co -Chair of the Mariner's Mile
Business Owners Group, stated that the people involved in this process
envisioned what Mariner's Mile would be in 20 years, believing that the area
will be a quality area and an area in which pedestrians feel safe about
walking on the sidewalk to frequent shops. He reported that the area
experienced many vacancies and had a lot of run -down buildings over the
last few years; however, there has been more renovations occurring and is
becoming a nicer place to conduct business. He stated that the design
framework and strategic vision is simple and just looks at putting a
landscaping continuum throughout the area, cleaning up the signage, and
establishing a theme for the area. He emphasized that the plan is not a
grand - scale, mass development plan and does not envision big high rises or
massive shopping centers. He stated that the business owners and property
owners have been involved and are willing to put the overlay on their
property and take on that burden when they develop their property. As far
as the area becoming sterile, Mr. Moreau expressed the opinion that the area
is very eclectic and wonderful, and hoped that this never changes. He
encouraged Council to adopt the resolution tonight.
Gordon Barienbrock, 3000 West Ocean Front, stated that he has been
involved with Mariner's Mile for some time and is the landowner of the
Chart House and Billy's on the Beach. He indicated that he is in favor of the
Volume 53 - Page 641
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 10, 2000
plan, but expressed concern relative to parking. He believed that the overall
area needs guidance relative to signage and planning.
There being no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member Glover to adopt Resolution No. 2000.89
approving the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision & Design Framework; and
introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -20 (Amendment No. 906), as amended, and
pass to second reading on October 24, 2000.
Council Member Debay indicated to Mr. Taylor that the issue will be back on
October 24 and so he and Mr. Robbins will have time to review the
documentation and make comments at the meeting if desired.
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 — at 9:00 p.m. in memory of Beverly Nestande.
The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on October 4, 2000, at
1:45 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of
Newport Beach Administration Building.
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
53 - Page 642
INDEX