Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5b_Newport Beach Workshop Flyer_2.36-8 p.m. Location: 16th Street Recreation Center 6-8 p.m. Location: TBD 6-8 p.m. Location: Back Bay Science Center 6-8 p.m. Location: Bonita Creek Community 6-8 p.m. Location: Newport Coast Community Center 6-8 p.m. Location: TBD The City of Newport Beach is launching a workshop series in neighborhoods across the City to engage in conversations about a vision for the City, community values, and the General Plan. We invite you to join us at a workshop in your neighborhood and help shape the future, together. Light refreshments and kid’s activities will be provided. Newport, Together is an opportunity for the City of Newport Beach to listen and learn from the Newport Beach community in preparation for a future General Plan Update. Can’t make the workshop? Head to www.NewportTogether.com to stay engaged! COME JOIN US FOR A WORKSHOP IN YOUR COUNCIL DISTRICT! •CONNECT WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS •SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE NEWPORT BEACH COMMUNITY’S VISION AND FUTURE •REVIEW COMMUNITY VALUES AND THE GENERAL PLAN, THE COMMUNITY’S GUIDING DOCUMENT *Dates, times and locations are all subject to change. District 2 November 12 District 3 November 14 District 7 November 20 District 1 December 12District 5 December 3 District 4 December 11 District 6 November 21 6-8 p.m. Location: OASIS Senior Center GP Update Steering Committee - November 6, 2019 Item No. 5b- Attachment 4 Council District Workshops As to its content, a fair portion of the bill relates to the “kick-off meeting.” I’m not sure the Committee or public has ever been fully apprised of what happened at that non-public meeting between the consultant and staff, and what decisions were made there. Item III.c. Review Kearns & West Invoice for September 2019 Of the tasks listed on page 2, the “internal summary and debrief for City and Kearns & West staff” of the September 12 and 25 Committee meetings is intriguing. I thought this was supposed to be a transparent process. Are there non-public summaries of what occurred that differ from what the Committee and public see? I am also uncertain what “Review of comments from Steering Committee member [singular] and response development” means. Has Kearns and West been using their contract to provide private responses to concerns raised by individual Committee members that are not shared with the rest of the Committee and the public? If so, that seems a misuse of public resources to me. Item V.a. October 26 Community Fair Event Recap and Engagement Updates What Mayor Dixon described at the November 5 City Council meeting as a “soft launch” has been announced in the City Manager’s November 1 The Week in Review as a “Success!” with over 400 people attending. I was only able to attend the first 90 minutes, and thought the attendance was sparse and may have included a large component of family members of the participating employees and organizations, as well as curious library-goers. I will be curious to see both what input was obtained and how many new people interested in continuing participation in the update process were recruited. As to the remainder to the engagement, the only item on the Newport, Together website that appears to have any activity (perhaps from the Launch Event??) is the interactive map, whose purpose (and usefulness) is not entirely clear to me. It would make some sense to see a map displaying the geographic demographics of the subset of people responding to a particular survey. But I don’t understand the significance of displaying the demographics of random people. Item V.b. Upcoming Council District Workshops I would have hoped to see a description of the proposed content and format of the workshops, but I see none. As to the flyer, a revised version was distributed at the November 5 City Council meeting and announced by the Mayor, and the dates and locations have appeared for some days on the City’s online calendar, and were finally added (on November 6) to the Newport, Together website, so it seems a bit late to change, but as to the already announced locations, why is the General Plan Update Steering Committee - November 6, 2019 Items No. III(a)(b)(c) and V(a)(b)(c) 2 Additional Materials Received District 3 Workshop being held at the Back Bay Science Center in District 41? The Mayor announced workshops would be held at locations convenient to the residents of each district. Since District 3 is generally west of the bay, it seems odd its residents are being asked to journey to the east side of the bay to a different district, and to a only partially-City-owned location close to none and inconvenient to all. Why would the City not be using one of its own community rooms in District 3, namely the Jorgenson Room at the Mariners Library or the Community Room at the Santa Ana Heights Fire Station? Other possibilities in District 3 might be the Muth Center or Newport Harbor High (or, if schools were to be considered, the Kaiser School – which, although technically in Costa Mesa, is the school most centrally located to District 3). If private facilities were to be considered, the YMCA and the Boys and Girls Club (again, technically in Costa Mesa but facing District 3 homes) come to mind. Item V.c. General Plan Update Timeline and RFP Drafting This item, like the others, is presented without explanation (and, in this case, as a non- computer-readable Timeline image). It is very disappointing to me, in that appears the City is anticipating devoting very little time to the actual revision of the General Plan, similar to what happened with the failed Land Use Element “oil change” in 2013. According to the City’s archives, the Land Use Element Amendment Advisory Committee first met on July 16, 2013, and as I recall by October 1, 2013, were told the package of land use changes presented by staff at the first meeting had to be finalized so traffic studies could be initiated for the environmental impact report, which was made available for public review between March 17, 2014 and April 30, 2014, with responses to comments completed some time later, and the changes to the land use maps and tables (only) being presented to voters as Measure Y on November 4, 2014. From this Timeline image, it looks like we are on a similar path. Is the plan to rush through a revised Land Use and Housing Elements, and then later develop a General Plan to fit them? As to the Timeline Image, based on the note at its bottom, the “Start Date”s listed are the deadlines for the items minus the amount of time anticipated in the “Duration” column. But readers are left to guess what date staff has worked backwards from. The last row, saying “Submit Adopted Housing Element for Final HCD Review,” with a Duration of 3 months, is particularly mysterious. Is the drop-dead due date to deliver the Council-adopted Housing Element to HCD the “Start Date” listed (October 1, 2021)? Or is it 3 months later (1/1/2022)? If it is January 1, why would the City wait 3 months after the election results are known to submit the element to HCD? If it is October 1, what does the 3 months mean? 1 Or is it in District 5? The Back Bay Science Center is on land that is not colored on the current NB Council Districts Map (which, curiously, says it is “December 12, 2018,” although I can’t guess on whose authority. The City Council met on December 11 of that year, but I can see nothing on the agenda about modifying the districts.). Whether the BBSC is closest to District 4 or District 5, it clearly isn’t in District 3, or even close to it. General Plan Update Steering Committee - November 6, 2019 Items No. III(a)(b)(c) and V(a)(b)(c) 2 Additional Materials Received