Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/12/2002 - Regular Meeting• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Regular Meeting February 12, 2002 - 7:10 p.m. INDEX - Cancelled due to a lack of quorum. CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. A. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:10 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING B. ROLL CALL Present: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: Glover, Proctor C. CLOSED SESSION REPORT - None. D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council Member Heffernan. E. INVOCATION - Rabbi Mark S. Miller, Temple Bat Yahm F. PRESENTATION United Way Presentation by Dan Ohl, City's United Way Representative G. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC H. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): • Council Member Heffernan stated that he has received comments, emails, and correspondence asking about the City's position on Measure W which is on the March ballot. Mayor Ridgeway indicated that the City Attorney is writing a statement on this issue for him. • Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg requested an agenda item in two weeks regarding the experience level of polygraph examiners who will be interviewing firefighters and police officers. He believed that Council should determine whether the Civil Service Board should review this issue. • Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg reported that the Balboa Island Bridge Project will begin in about a month. He announced that the Balboa Island Improvement Association will be holding a community meeting on this project at the Carroll Beek Community Center on February 20. He stated that he, along with staff, will be in attendance to answer questions. Volume 54 - Page 701 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg reported that Measure W is the Great Park Initiative. He stated that, if Measure W passes, it will cause a problem in terms of getting an airport at El Toro. He indicated that, not having an airport at El Toro, will have an impact on John Wayne Airport (JWA) and, therefore, a negative impact on the City. He encouraged everyone to ask questions and vote in March. He stated that he will be voting no on Measure W. Council Member Heffernan announced that the Mormon Temple which is in District 5, but encircled by District 7, has raised many questions. He stated that he generates a monthly update for the homeowner associations in District 7 and that he will be including a ballot to find out whether people are opposed to or in favor of the project. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the City has received calls and letters from constituents asking about the City's position on Measure W. He reported that the City has had a longstanding policy supporting the development of a commercial airport at El Toro and emphasized that Measure W is inconsistent with that policy. He stated that the City has spent over $11 million over the last 20 years to get an airport at El Toro. He indicated that Council has asked the attorneys to determine what additional steps can be taken regarding the reuse of El Toro. He assured everyone that he will take every action that he legally can to express the City's position that El Toro should be developed as a commercial airport. He reported that the City was sued and is in the process of settling the lawsuit. He stated that, as Mayor, he will be issuing a proclamation tomorrow which states that Measure W is inconsistent with the current policy. He believed this to be a step in the right direction. I. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2002. 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. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 3. Removed at the request of Council Member Heffernan. 4. Removed at the request of an audience member. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 5. RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 42, TRANSPORTATION CONGESTION IMPROVEMENT ACT. Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -17 in support of Proposition 42, the Transportation Congestion Improvement Act on the March 5, 2002 Primary Election Volume 54 - Page 702 Res 2002 -17 Proposition 42 (48/85) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX Volume 54 - Page 703 ballot. 6. Removed at the request of Council Member Heffernan. 7. TERMINATION OF NON - EXCLUSIVE COMMERCIAL SOLID Res 2002 -19 WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH CST Commercial ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -19 terminating Solid Waste the solid waste franchise agreement between the City of Newport Beach Franchise /CST and CST Environmental, Inc. Environmental (42) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 8. WATER QUALITY CIRCULATION EVALUATIONS - APPROVAL C -3485 OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH EVEREST Water Quality INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Approve a Professional Circulation Services Agreement with Everest International Consultants, Inc. of Long Evaluations Beach for Water Quality Circulation Evaluations at a contract price of (38) $34,000, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement. 9. ZONE V BACKUP GENERATOR - AWARD OF CONTRACT C -3506 (C- 3506). 1) Approve the design build approach for completion of this Zone V Backup project; 2) award the contract (C -3506) to Rich Construction for the total Generator Design/Build price of $92,084.18 and authorize the Mayor and the City (38) Clerk to execute the contract; and 3) establish an amount of $9,200 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. 10. MARINERS DRIVE SPILLWAY - AWARD OF CONTRACT C -3390 (C- 3390). 1) Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract Mariners Drive (C -3390) to K.A.S. Equipment & Rental, Inc. for the total bid price of Spillway $49,982.50 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the (38) contract; and 3) establish an amount of $4,998 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. 11. BALBOA BOULEVARD RECONSTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE C -3428 IMPROVEMENTS FROM MEDINA WAY TO 12TH STREET - STPL BA -029 5151 (014), AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3428). 1) Approve the plans Balboa Boulevard and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3428) to Sully- Miller Reconstruction and Contracting Company for the total bid price of $1,694,474 and authorize Drainage/ the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; 3) establish an STPL 5151 (014) amount of $169,000 to cover the cost of material testing and unforeseen (38/40) work; 4) authorize a budget amendment (BA -029) to appropriate $427,986.56 of Federal Highway AHRP Funds STPL 5151 (014) into Account No. 7285- C5100582; and 5) authorize a budget amendment (BA- 029) to increase revenue estimates by $427,986.56 to Account No. 285- 4880. 12. Removed at the request of an audience member. 13. UNIVERSITY DRIVE ZONE III 16 -INCH WATER MAIN C -3468 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3468). 1) University Drive Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3468) to Zone III Brongo Construction for the total bid price of $116,650 and authorize the Water Main Volume 54 - Page 703 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; and 3) establish an Improvement amount of $10,000 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. (38) 14. AWARD OF NEWPORT COAST RESIDENTIAL REFUSE C- 3513/Newport COLLECTION CONTRACT AGREEMENT (contd. from 1/8/02). Coast Refuse Continued to the February 26, 2002, Council meeting. Collection (38) MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 15. APPROVE PURCHASE OF 15 AUTOMATED EMERGENCY Emergency DEFIBRILLATORS AND ACCESSORIES TO REPLACE Defibrillators ANTIQUATED FIREFIGHTER EQUIPMENT. Approve the purchase (41) of 15 Laerdal Medical Heartstart FR 2 semi - automatic defibrillators for total price of $49,009.96. 16. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT INITIATIONS — INITIATION OF GI 2001 -001 AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE Newport Village/ NEWPORT VILLAGE AND SHELLMAKER ISLAND SITES. Shellmaker Island Initiate the amendment to the General Plan, Land Use Element as (45) recommended by the Planning Commission by approving GI 2001 -001. 17. Removed at the request of Council Member Heffernan. S22. CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER -DAY SAINTS TEMPLE. C- 3514 /Church of Approve a Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates of Jesus Christ of Irvine, California, for professional environmental services to prepare an Latter -Day Saints Environmental Impact Report for a not to exceed cost of $57,085. Temple EIR (38) Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (3, 4, 6, 12 and 17), and noting the continuance of Item No. 14. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor J. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3. ESTABLISH SPEED LIMITS ON STREETS THAT WERE Ord 2002 -4 RECENTLY ANNEXED BY THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. Speed Limits (85) In response to Council Member Heffernan's questions, Public Works Director Badum stated that speed surveys are set by strict State warrants. He reported that, since there has not been a lot of enforcement by the County, the City is seeing higher speeds which may be contributing to the higher speed count in the surveys. He stated that staff is proposing that the City conduct another speed survey after regular enforcement has occurred, believing that the speeds will drop by as much as 5 mph on certain streets. Mr. Badum stated that the City does not enforce speed limits in private communities unless there is an Volume 54 - Page 704 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 agreement with the homeowners associations. This would come before Council for approval. City Manager Bludau added that, in addition to being approved by the City, the streets would need to meet City standards. Council Member Heffernan noted that this is not a matter of contention for him, but stated that this is the reason the City will not be enforcing speed limits on private streets. Dolores Otting stated that this issue came up a few years ago for Spyglass Hill Road. She noted that the speed limits for certain areas of Coast Highway that belong to the State can be reduced to 40 or 45 mph, but the City cannot do this on arterial streets due to State laws. She stated that her homeowners association posted signs because of children playing in the area and suggested that Newport Coast do the same. Mr. Badum stated that all speed limits under the City's jurisdiction are governed by the State and added that the City does not have the ability to make adjustments to Coast Highway. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, noted that the speed limits were already set prior to the City annexing the area and asked why the City is changing them without warning the residents. Motion by Council Member Adams to adopt Ordinance No. 2002 -4 amending Chapter 12.24 (Special Speed Zones) of the NBMC to add streets recently relinquished to or annexed by the City of Newport Beach. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover. Proctor 4. AMENDMENT TO THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE ALLOWING THE CITY COUNCIL TO WAIVE THE COLLECTION OF CERTAIN SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE FEES. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that the City is in dire need of fees and asked why it is willing to waive them. He indicated that, if there is a shortage of refuse sites, they need to recycle and make sure the refuse is getting to where it needs to be. He expressed the opinion that waiving the fees tells them to do what they want with the refuse. Dolores Otting distributed correspondence to Council. She stated that she brought this item to the City's attention two weeks ago and received a letter from the City Manager. She reported that the reason for the fees is for road and alley repairs associated with franchise operations; however, franchise haulers do not drive down alleys because their trucks are too large. She reported that, when she went before the City to become a non - exclusive franchise hauler, they competed and still had to pay money. Ms. Otting stated that the City got insurance for all the haulers because there was no insurance they could buy, but reported that the insurance included a covered location endorsement. She took issue that the insurance policy also applies toward the loss of remediation Volume 54 - Page 705 INDEX Ord 2002 -5 Solid Waste Franchise Fees (44) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX expenses arising from pollution conditions on, at, or emanating from those covered locations. She stated that the fees do not even pay for superfund exclusions or anything that happens at landfills. She added that Reliance Insurance Company is bankrupt and stated that she is not sure who will assume their liability from 1996. She believed that the City needs to look at the 16% franchise fee. Regarding waiving Waste Management's franchise fee, she stated that picking up the trash in Newport Coast is a privilege, especially since the City did not go out to bid. Madeline Arakelian, former owner of South Coast Refuse, stated that she was very involved with their non - exclusive franchise agreement negotiations. She expressed concern that the City is waiving the fee for Waste Management in Newport Coast while the other haulers are having to pay. She noted that this fee is added to the customers' bills. She stated that the City indicated that everyone was supposed to be equal and able to have a non - exclusive franchise agreement. She added that this contract did not go out to bid and there was no open discussion about it. She reported that the City, Costa Mesa, and part of Irvine are the only areas that allow waste hauling businesses in a free enterprise system. She indicated that she is on a task force in Sacramento through the California Chamber and added that they have concerns for small businesses because individuals are not able to start small businesses. She requested that Council pull this item and consider it with Item No. 14 (Award of Newport Coast Residential Refuse Collection Contract). Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg stated that staff is reporting that the 16% franchise fee is generally added to customer invoices and, since the City is the customer in this case, this is why it is waiving Waste Management's fee. Ms. Arakelian agreed that haulers generally line item the fee out to its customers. However, she explained that haulers pay the fees associated with an exclusive franchise agreement since it is a privilege to have the contract. She indicated that they generally do not charge the customer back in this case. City Manager Bludau explained that the City provides, through City employees, residential pick up for most of Newport Beach. When Newport Coast was annexed, part of the negotiations included that the City would provide free residential trash pickup, similar to what is being provided in about 90% of the community. He stated that the City will pay Waste Management for residential pickup and explained that the ordinance allows the City, who is the customer, not to charge the 16% fee because it comes back to the City anyway. He asked why the City would charge the 16% fee if the hauler will be turning around and paying it back to the City. He indicated that this is the only circumstance in which the 16% is waived. Mr. Bludau reported that the City did not have the right to provide residential trash pickup with City employees since State law prevents the City from entering into or removing the provider of that service upon annexation. He added that the City has to give them five years notice that it will be taking over the service. General Services Director Niederhaus reported that Waste Management will continue to have a contract with the County until the City brings Volume 54 - Page 706 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX forward the Waste Management contract for Newport Coast. He indicated that they currently cover Region 7 which includes Newport Coast. He stated that, if Item No. 14 is approved when it comes back to Council, the County will amend its contract for the remaining portion of Region 7. He indicated that he is not sure how long they have left on the County contract. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg noted that, if they have less than five years on their contract, the City is not obligated to keep them for another five years. Mr. Niederhaus stated that there is a Public Resources Code (PRC) which states that, if a waste hauler has been providing service to an area, they have a right to maintain that for five more years. He indicated that the City has given notice to Waste Management that their contract will go out for competitive bid and confirmed that their agreement with the County is exclusive. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg indicated that the second paragraph in PRE 49520 states that, if a solid waste enterprise has an exclusive franchise or contract, the solid waste enterprise shall continue to provide those services and shall be limited to the unexpired term of the contract or franchise for five years, whichever is less. He believed that, if Waste Management has three years left on their contract, the City does not have to enter into a contract with them for five years. In response to Council Member Heffernan's questions, Mr. Bludau confirmed that this service is included in the annexation budget. Following this contract, he stated that it is not their intention to add staff in order to do this, but they will probably go out to bid. He indicated that all residential refuse service is picked up by City trucks, except for some Bonita Canyon areas that were recently annexed. Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg asked if this item should be continued and discussed with Item No. 14. Mr. Bludau stated that this should be done if Council disagrees that it should not charge itself the fee. Mayor Ridgeway added that this applies month -to- month. Mr. Niederhaus reported that this ordinance would also apply to a current situation in which the City is paying a hauler for all the blue bins at 12 City locations. He emphasized that the ordinance was not generated because of the Waste Management contract, but because the City found no logic in charging itself. Council Member Heffernan noted that the City is the payer of the bill, but there are private parties that are paying the bill for refuse collection. He asked if there was an equal protection argument that the City is getting a better deal than others are allowed. City Attorney Burnham stated that this was not the case in his opinion since the circumstances are different. Mayor Ridgeway requested that PRC 49520 be evaluated before Council considers Item No. 14. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to adopt Ordinance No. 2002 -5 amending Section 12.63.140 of Title 12 of the NBMC. Volume 54 - Page 707 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 6. roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor FEE SCHEDULE ADJUSTMENTS. Council Member Heffernan stated that the fee schedule adjustment is being done tonight to increase some fees and include others that were not previously included. He indicated that the City periodically evaluates the cost of services provided and, therefore, fees increase as costs increase. Further, as time goes on, the City does services it previously did not do and has to charge for them. Mayor Ridgeway pointed out that decreases are also being made. Building Director Elbettar reported that the Building Department portion reduces fees for a majority of smaller projects. He explained that the current fee is a flat fee regardless of the scope or size of the project, and they realized that this is inequitable for smaller projects. City Manager Bludau stated that, a: 848 fees are attached. He indicated just pertain to about 30 fees. part of the resolution, a listing of that the changes proposed tonight Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that there is no fee to construct a dock in The Grand Canal and asked if this is going to be added. He noted that there is an $850 fee to construct a pier; however, there are no piers on The Grand Canal. He added that it does not appear that the piers are following the design specifications and that access structures are not taken into consideration. Mr. Bludau pointed out that the permit fees for pier structure plan reviews are listed on pages 15 and 16. Mr. Bludau reported that the fee structure is normally brought back at the end of the fiscal year so a new fee schedule is in place for the new fiscal year. He explained that this is coming before Council in the middle of the fiscal year because of the reduction in the Building Department fees and because there were some fees that were not included in the last resolution. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg to adopt Resolution No. 2002 -18 updating the City's Fee Schedule. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor Volume 54 - Page 708 INDEX Res 2002 -18 Fee Schedule (40) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 12. BALBOA ISLAND PAVEMENT REHABILITATION AND WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT —AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3397). Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that he does not know who did the work on Little Balboa Island, but hoped that the City uses that project as an example of what not to do since the concrete cracked. He added that there is also a drainage issue around Little Balboa Island. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg stated that he walked the entire Island with Public Works Director Badum who took notes of the areas that needed concrete repair or replacement. He indicated that he received a report from Mr. Badum that the repairs/replacements will be undertaken. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg to 1) approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3397) to Damon Construction Company for the total bid price of $517,004 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; and 3) establish an amount of $51,700 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor 17. COUNCIL REVIEW OF FY 2002 -2003 BUDGET PREPARATION PARAMETERS FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO CITY DEPARTMENTS (INFORMATION ONLY). Council Member Heffernan stated that the staff report outlines the process they will be starting for fiscal year 2002 -2003 and noted that shortfalls will eventually be reflected in the budget. He stated that the outfalls include a reduced sales tax estimate of almost $1.1 million; reduced hotel tax of $585,000; reduced Vehicle License Fees (VLF) from the State of $2.7 million; and $500,000 for airport- related expenses. He added that, not included in the shortfall projection is a rollback of property tax increases due to the Seal Beach case in which the assessor's ability to rollback 2% /year of the assessed value is limited. He stated that residents have to know that the City will have to draw the line and make necessary cutbacks since this will not be a flush year. Regarding the rollback of property taxes, Mayor Ridgeway announced that it would be an ongoing $1.7 million annual loss. Further, it is argued that the City may have to pay the County back $3.7 million for moneys they collected. He noted that revenues will decrease while service costs increase. Administrative Services Director Danner stated that the secured property tax revenue for fiscal year 2000 -2001 was about $24.6 million. He indicated that the current year for the same property, not including Newport Coast, would be $26.9 million (8% increase). He added that they are factoring another 3% increase in the new year ($27.7 million). He Volume 54 - Page 709 INDEX C -3397 Balboa Island Pavement Rehabilitation and Water Main Replacement (38) FY 2002 -2003 Budget Preparation (40) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX stated that they are projecting to receive $2.4 million for the current fiscal year from what the County, Fire Authority, and library used to receive, and $4.8 million next year. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that he was assured that when underground utilities was being installed that property taxes would not increase. Mayor Ridgeway noted that the issue tonight deals with budgeting only, but added that property taxes automatically increase 2% every year due to State law. Motion by Council Member Heffernan to receive and file. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor K. PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, asked why the City is refusing to give documentation that he has requested. He stated that he submitted a letter to the Public Information Officer requesting documents, but he cannot get a reason why she cannot present the documents to him. He stated that he requested The Grand Canal billing records from 1976 to 1993, and the reason it was changed from a residential pier (RP) number to a mooring (MR) number. He added that he was handed a letter on December 16, 2001, which states that steps will be constructed down to the beach, and asked why the City put in a ladder rather than steps. Stewart Berkshire, 1770 W. Balboa Boulevard, stated that he lives in Marinapark. He believed that there was supposed to be discussion during the study session regarding their new lease and noted that their current lease expires on March 15. He requested that the City grant them a three year lease renewal since the small extensions delay some of their decisions as to whether to replace carpeting or repaint. Further, he does not believe anything will happen on the property within the three year period. He requested that, if any change in terms are being considered, they be given them in advance in order to review them. Mayor Ridgeway indicated that they will be contacted. Barbara Lichman, Airport Working Group Chairperson, stated that all El Toro airport supporters were gratified to hear Council's strong support tonight. She requested that Council follow through as quickly as possible to memorialize the City's feelings about Measure W. She indicated that they have been receiving a lot of calls from people who tell them they do not understand why Measure W is so important if the City does not think so. Ms. Lichman reported that AWG opposes Measure W because it is really not for a park, but only rezones El Toro to an open space designation which can also be used for high rise developments, industrial parks, or landfills. Further, if it were used for a park, it could not be built because it is too expensive. She pointed out that Irvine will be voting on Volume 54 - Page 710 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX whether to increase an assessment to keep its parks and streets looking good, and emphasized that Irvine cannot even afford its own parks, yet alone a Great Park that may cost $2.1 billion. She added that the proposed park will be located on a toxic sewer and will not be healthy for anybody's children to play in. Mayor Ridgeway requested that the Measure W proclamation incorporate Ms. Lichman's comments. John Nelson took issue with the manner in which Council based its Marinapark decisions at the last meeting. He stated that many of the Council Members stated that the project was best for the City, but since people did not want it, they would not support it. He believed this to be an incredulous statement and asked what justification there is to not support something that is in the best interest of the City. He stated that Council is supposed to make decisions based on what is in the best interest of the City and that, anything to the contrary, shortchanges the future well -being of the citizens of Newport Beach. He believed that some Council Members lack the courage to make the really hard decisions that test the true nature of their character and the commitment to the long term welfare of the community. He stated that, when a contentious issue is at hand and the choice has to be made between what is best and what may be popular, the correct decision is to do what is best. Mr. Nelson also took issue with the statement that government is run by those who show up. He stated that government is supposed to be run by its elected leaders and not by the audience. Further, one should not have to show up in order to ensure that this Council will act in the best interest of the community since you are the individuals elected to run the affairs of the City based on your wisdom, knowledge, and foresight. He stated that Council is expected to be leaders. Mr. Nelson emphasized that it is wrong to vote with the constituency rather than for what is best for the community. Further, it is wrong to avoid contentious issues that should be welcomed as an opportunity for Council to show true leadership. Larry Root, AWG member, stated that the most important issue ever to face the Orange County voters will be on the ballot on March 5. He indicated that Measure W was placed on the ballot by those who do not want an airport at El Toro and added that it allows the voters to choose between a Great Park that will be paid for by all Orange County taxpayers or an airport that will not cost Orange County taxpayers anything. He reported that El Toro is 4,700 acres and contains runways, an air terminal, and other support buildings which are surrounded by an additional 14,000 acres of vacant land that is to be used as a noise suppression zone. Mr. Root emphasized that the airport is ready to be used and reiterated that it will not cost the taxpayers any money. He stated that ownership of El Toro which includes the land, improvements, facilities, and noise suppression zone, will be handed over to the County for $1, but only if Measure W is defeated. However, if Measure W passes, every household in Orange County will incur a 10% increase in their property taxes for the next 20+ years. He noted that this benefits residents of only one city. He stated that, if voters vote no on Measure W, they will get a great airport site which includes a 1,000 acre park, a golf Volume 54 - Page 711 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 11013 D1:4 course, eventually 65,000 new jobs, millions of dollars of new revenue, and no increase in taxes. Mr. Root emphasized that Measure W is wrong for Orange County and encouraged everyone to vote no on Measure W and stop the "Great Tax". Virgil Galey, 211 Via Ravenna, AWG member, stated that the City is in a battle to stop the anti - airport people and that they need every bit of support from Newport Beach. He pointed out that only 30% of Orange County's voters are from South County and believed that they can defeat Measure W if they put out the issue. He referred to newspaper articles which state that Irvine, since 1997, has doubled the cost of parks and maintenance and are asking for an increase which can reflect on the Great Park costs. He noted that Mayor Agran of Irvine said that the Great Park will not cost the taxpayers anything, but emphasized that this is false. Further, he noted that Mayor Hahn of Los Angeles wants to hire more police to patrol their "crime ridden, plagued parks" and added that large parks breed those types of dangers. He added that Supervisor Smith stated that he will not vote on the John Wayne Airport (JWA) Settlement Agreement until after the election, and Supervisor Silva stated that, if Measure W passes, he will not support El Toro airport anymore. Mr. Galey stated that this means that JWA will probably lose its restrictions. He reported that South County has 78,000 acres of parks, while North County only has 8,000 acres of parks. He stated that South County wants more parks for the rest of the County to pay for. He urged everyone to vote no on Measure W to protect our future. Dan Stringer, 700 South Bay Front, AWG member, commended Council for their comments tonight. He reported that, like Measure F, Measure W is a sham because it has nothing to do with the Great Park. He stated that Irvine and South County has had 40 years to develop the Great Park since they had the finances and the land; however, all of a sudden they decide the County needs a great park. He urged everyone to vote no on Measure W. Richard Taylor, 1612 Highland Drive, AWG member, stated that he just left the Newport -Mesa Unified School District Board meeting because they had a resolution on their agenda to condemn Measure W and support Scenario One of the JWA Settlement Agreement as proposed by the City. He stated that he urged the School Board to take a more direct role in informing the parents of the upcoming election through their children. He reported that he read into their record an email he received from a South County supporter informing him that a rally was held at the Capistrano Unified School District over the weekend. He stated that they used their offices to stuff 80,000 circulars for distribution to the school children on public school days with public tax dollars which urges their parents to vote yes on Measure W. He stated that the School Board's jaws dropped after he read this. Mr. Taylor applauded Council for what they are doing tonight and for the proclamation that is forthcoming. He urged the constituents to understand this issue and for Council to convey the meaning of Measure W. He emphasized that, if Measure W passes, JWA will exponentially increase. He pointed out that Supervisors Silva and Smith are very reluctant to sign off on any Settlement Agreement if Measure W passes. He expressed his hope that Volume 54 - Page 712 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 INDEX the people speaking tonight on other issues will take that same energy, drive, and money, and use it to help defeat Measure W and make this a better community for everyone, not just a few residents. Mayor Pro Tom Bromberg stated that people of the City owe an incredible debt of gratitude to AWG. He added that the people speaking tonight is just a small fraction of those who have dedicated themselves to the airport issue. Madeline Arakelian reported that she lives on the Peninsula and that the Fire Department did a good job saving her house from a fire that occurred next door. She stated that she had not been to the property for two months due to a family emergency and was only informed of the fire because the Fire Department knew her. She asked if property owners are notified of fires if they do not live in the property. Mayor Ridgeway instructed the City Manager to have the Fire Chief look into this. Dolores Otting presented Council with a handout pertaining to Item No. 14. She reported that Waste Management's agreement expires June 30, 2007, and that they bill three months in advance. She added that there is a nominal franchise fee paid to the County for administrating the contract, and believed that the City should at least get money for postage. She stated that she does not understand why the City would give Waste Management a five year notice since it does not have the exclusive contract with them. Further, she expressed concern that they may think they have a 10 year contract since there is a five year notice and a five year contract. She read PRC 49522 and Government Code Section 57376 from the handout, and noted that she will be addressing Measure Q at another meeting. She stated that it was her understanding from discussions with Mr. Niederhaus that the City was also going to pay for apartment refuse services. She referenced the pre - annexation agreement pages included with the handout that discuss curbside residential refuse collection and believed that the handout version includes extra language. Mayor Ridgeway requested that the City Clerk incorporate the handout with Item No. 14 at the time it comes back to Council. Russell Niewiarowski, 20102 Kline Drive, Santa Ana Heights, believed that the Great Park is actually a great lie that is fabricated by the Mayor of Irvine. He stated that people need to wake up and think about what the impacts of an expanded JWA would be on the community. He indicated that, if there is no airport at El Toro, there will definitely be an international airport at JWA. He stated that Newport Beach is not even talking about this reality anymore, but is only talking about a JWA Settlement Agreement. He stated that the City promised Santa Ana Heights that they would meet and discuss the Settlement Agreement, but never did. Further, the City Attorney told people not to make comments on the JWA Environmental Impact Report (EIR). He emphasized that Santa Ana Heights residents do not want any expansion at JWA and that this is the right approach. Further, they feel they are carrying their share of the burden and that South County also should. He stated that, if the City is going to allow a few gates, JWA should be made into an Volume 54 - Page 713 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 international airport and Santa Ana Heights should be destroyed. He indicated that this will mean that the rest of the impacts from the international airport will go to the Newport Coast and Balboa residents. He pointed out that there is an alternative airport plan in the V -Plan. Mr. Niewiarowski referenced a newspaper article today in which it only took one photographer to expose the unlawful dumping of waste, and believed that the City is doing this again with the JWA Settlement Agreement. L. ORAL REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Council Member Adams announced that the General Plan Update Committee (GPUC) met twice in the last four weeks to review 251 General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) applications for 37 positions. He stated that GPUC nominated 52 individuals who will now be filling out the standard Board, Commission, and Committee application so Council can review the expanded applications for each person. He expressed the opinion that the group is balanced and noted that this will be coming before Council at the February 26 Council meeting. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg added that he also serves on GPUC with Council Members Adams and Heffernan. He stated that the process went well and emphasized that there is a cross - section of individuals. He added that there are a lot of names on the list that he does not recognize. Council Member Heffernan reported that he serves on the Telecommunications Committee and noted that there have been disruptions in cable service, specifically internet service. He stated that the City collects a small franchise fee from the cable operators and that their contracts are in the process of being renegotiated. He emphasized that the cable companies are heavily regulated by Federal law and that the City does not have the discretion over cable/internet service. He indicated that the City will do what it can, but this is a provider /customer issue, not a City issue. Council Member Adams reported that the Council Committee to review Harbor Commission applications has received the applications, but has been delayed in part due to GPAC nominations. He indicated that the Committee members, consisting of himself and Council Members Heffernan and Glover, will be establishing a short list and then deciding on who to interview. M. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AND ORAL STATUS REPORT 18. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 7, 2002. Regarding Item 1 (Riverboat Cafe), Assistant City Manager Wood reported that the Commission authorized use of one of their outdoor decks with a condition of approval that it come back to the Commission after the summer months to see if it impacted the residential neighbors. However, since one or two neighbors spoke about minor concerns, the Commission authorized continuation of the outdoor use, but amended the condition of review to come back next January. Volume 54 - Page 714 INDEX Planning (68) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 Regarding Item 2 (Initiation of General Plan Amendments), Ms. Wood noted that this was on the agenda tonight (Item No. 16) for initiation. Regarding Item 3 (Van Cleve Residence), Ms. Wood stated that this was continued from the previous meeting. She reported that the house is legally, non - conforming due to the amount of floor area it has. She noted that it was built before the zoning code was amended to restrict the amount of floor area and added that the Code provides that someone can maintain the non - conformity while remodeling as long as they stay within certain limits of the amount of house that was replaced. However, the limit was exceeded in this case and the property owner appealed the Planning Director's determination as to how the City measures the extent of structural alterations. She reported that, after two hearings on this item, the Commission upheld the Planning Director's determination. She noted that this item has been called for review and will be on Council's agenda either February 26 or March 12. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that, if the floor space is allowed, Council will be keeping the dwelling space that was established in 1971 for Balboa Island and Little Balboa Island. He believed that homes are now being built taller. Without objection, the item was received and filed. N. PUBLIC HEARINGS 19. FY 2000 -2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER). Senior Planner Trimble stated that this is a required reporting action under the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. He indicated that approval will close out the fiscal year 2000 -2001 program year. He introduced Rudy Munoz with LDM Associates who assisted with the the report and will be providing ongoing supplemental administrative services. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. Hearing no public testimony, he closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to approve the FY 2000 -2001 CAPER and direct staff to submit the document to all appropriate parties. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor Volume 54 - Page 715 INDEX FY 2000 -2001 CDBG/ CAPER (87) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 20. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 2804 BROAD STREET, NEWPORT HEIGHTS (N2000 -263). Public Works Director Badum stated that this issue was before Council on July 25, 2000, and was denied. He explained that this was brought back tonight in an effort to give the property owner an opportunity to respond to the denial because he was not present at the previous meeting. He reported that this involves a small property wall in the public right -of -way on Broad Street. He stated that the original wall was built in 1987 without a permit and was modified in 1999 to a brick wall. He indicated that the wall violates Council Policy L -6 which does not allow encroachments in excess of three feet within the public right -of- way. He stated that staff is recommending that Council deny the application and reinforce the previous Council action. Mr. Badum reported that a denial means that the wall must be removed. Council Member Adams pointed out that this is in Council Member Glover's district, she made the motion in 2000 to deny the request, and the denial received a unanimous vote. He noted that the Council Member representing this district is not in attendance to vote on this issue. Laurence Nokes, 450 Ocean Avenue, Laguna Beach, stated that he represents the owner, Bob Malanga. He indicated that the original wall was constructed in 1987 and was consistent with improvements that existed on Broad Street. He stated that Mr. Malanga's first wall was filled with wood in- betweens which began to rot in 1995 and that he replaced it by filling the in- betweens with brick. He noted that Mr. Malanga called the Planning Department and believed that he could build something as long as he did not increase the height. He expressed the opinion that the current wall is consistent with the character along Broad Street and is probably in better condition than some of the hedges and walls on Broad Street. He stated that Mr. Malanga apologizes for not being at the last Council meeting but he did not receive notice, adding that Mr. Malanga paid his original application fee and was waiting to receive notice. Mr. Nokes stated that, in return for the City's allowing the maintenance of the wall, Mr. Malanga agreed to remove the wall at his expense upon reasonable notice. He indicated that the original justification for asking for the wall to be removed was to accommodate a sidewalk; however, this has changed and now they want to remove it because it is too thick or unsightly. He stated that they feel it is more attractive than many of the things that currently exist on Broad Street. In response to Council Member Heffernan's questions, Mr. Nokes stated that Mr. Malanga was in attendance but is no longer in the audience. He added that Mr. Malanga does not intend to speak tonight. Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg stated that the wall is beautiful; however, the problem that the City faces is that it is a high density community and some feel that, if one can do it and the others cannot, it sets a precedent. Volume 54 - Page 716 EPN 2000 -263 2804 Broad Street (65) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 N11 He indicated that there is such high density living in the City, that if it does not stay as close to the process, it gets out of control and problems arise. Mr. Nokes stated that he agrees and is familiar with the issues Council faces and knows that they are fair and equally enforced. He indicated that this encroachment exists the same distance from the street centerline as the other encroachments. He believed that the issue primarily has to do with the mass of the wall since it would take machinery and a couple of hours to take it down. He reiterated that Mr. Malanga is happy to do this upon notice by the City if it is needed to accommodate the sidewalk. However, if there is some other change they can make to the wall to make it acceptable, they are happy to do that. Council Member Adams emphasized that they are not setting the terms, Council is, adding that it is his understanding that, if denied, the wall must be removed. Mr. Nokes stated that, if this is denied, they will ask Public Works if there is anything they can do and what they can build instead. City Manager Bludau confirmed that it is staff's expectation that the wall be removed if this is denied. Mr. Bludau stated that there is no question that the wall is beautiful; however, there is a difference between a picket fence and a brick wall. Further, there is a policy that protects encroachments from things like waterlines or City lines that run under the encroachment permit area. He stated that staff should not be placed in a position in which they may need to take emergency action to remove a solid wall like this. Mayor Ridgeway noted that this is a permanent structure and the City cannot set precedence. Regarding reasonable notice, he stated that Mr. Malanga was given notice two years ago, but the wall is still there. He took issue with the fifth paragraph in a letter from Mr. Malanga dated January 25, 2002, which basically states that Associate Civil Engineer Wong blessed the project. He stated that he did a similar encroachment in 1990 and Mr. Wong never blessed his project, adding that he was probably more an impediment to the project. He indicated that he will not be supporting the wall. Mr. Nokes assured everyone that there was no intention to mislead Council or say anything that was inaccurate. He indicated that the letter reflects Mr. Malanga's state of mind, adding that Mr. Malanga did talk with Mr. Wong who told him the location of the setback. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg's question, Mr. Nokes believed that Mr. Malanga has discussed the matter with Council Member Glover, but he has not. He added that she lives within 500 feet of the house. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg stated that, if Mr. Nokes could persuade Council Member Glover, this item could come back. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, asked why the City will not allow this individual to have a brick wall that does not seem to be in anyone's way, impedes the sidewalk, or obstructs the public right -of way, believing that it betters the community. However, if Mr. Malanga is trying to incorporate the area as his own, there is an issue to be addressed. He reiterated that, if it is not unsightly and well maintained, he does not see the reason why it should be removed. He suggested that the City even place its seal on the wall and added that no neighbor is objecting to the Volume 54 - Page 717 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 structure. Motion by Council Member Adams to deny the request. Council Member Heffernan asked if staff received any comments from Council Member Glover about this item. Mayor Ridgeway noted that there is prior action. Council Member Adams added that Council Member Glover can call the item back if she has a problem with the vote. Council Member Heffernan stated that he is in favor of letting Mr. Malanga keep the fence if there was a misunderstanding and if the City can require Mr. Malanga to move the fence. He indicated that he will not be supporting the motion. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: O'Neil, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: Heffernan, Bromberg Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor 21. REPORT ON FLETCHER JONES MOTORCARS REVENUES FROM SALES AND OTHER TAXES. Senior Planner Trimble stated that the staff report reviews the sales tax and other revenues generated by the Fletcher Jones Motorcars operation. He indicated that, as a provision of the 1995 memorandum of understanding, they were required to contribute at least $2 million in total tax revenue over the first five years of operation. He reported that the threshold was significantly exceeded. Further, he noted that the report reviews the assistance provided under the MOU and reviews the revenues during that time period. He stated that the $6.5 million net benefit, when measured in 1995 dollars, is about $5.4 million. Mayor Ridgeway noted that the City received a lot of criticism at the time this agreement was entered into and that the City did not give up hard dollars, but soft dollars. He explained that the City waived fees and only gave away $30,000 worth of land. He reported that the net dollar amount is above and beyond the fees that were waived. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Brombere to receive and file the report. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Bromberg, Adams, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Glover, Proctor P. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Council Member Heffernan indicated that he wanted to discuss Item No. S22 (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints Temple Environmental Impact Volume 54 - Page 718 INDEX C -3067 Fletcher Jones Motorcars/ Revenues (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 12, 2002 Report). Council Member Adams noted that Council Member Heffernan can make a motion for reconsideration. Council Member Heffernan stated that he has received a number of comments on this and that he does not believe that the staff report addresses the concerns he is hearing. City Manager Bludau stated that Council can discuss this right now, but they should vote on whether to reconsider it or not. He noted that Deputy City Clerk Brown read the item number into the record for approval in the Consent Calendar. Council Member Heffernan stated that he can address this when the EIR comes back. Q. ADJOURNMENT - 9:25 p.m. awt,ttfc *sn- x *a�ta�sws * *x The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on February 6, 2002, at 4:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. The supplemental agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on February 8, 2002, at 2:30 p.m, on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk V - av�' .K. �t moI / Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 54 - Page 719 INDEX