HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/2008 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
City Council Study Session
October 14, 2008 — 4:00 p.m.
I. ROLL CALL
Present: Council Member Henn, Mayor Pro Tem Daigle, Mayor Selich, Council Member Webb,
Council Member Curry, Council Member Gardner
Absent: Council Member Rosansky
II. CURRENT. BUSINESS
1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
Mayor Pro Tem Daigle requested that the project design schedule be included in Item 5
(Kings Road/Kings Place Pavement Reconstruction) prior to its approval.
In response to Council Member Gardner's question regarding Item 16 (Contract for
Environmental Consulting Services for Hyatt Regency EIR), Assistant City Manager Wood
confirmed that staff will be involved in the process.
Public Works Director Badum clarified for Council Member Gardner that, for Item 20 (Coast
Highway Relinquishment), the City is requesting that Caltrans evaluate the condition of the
bridge over Back Bay Channel and currently there are no problems with the bridge.
Council Member Webb noted a typographical error on the letter that needs to be amended
prior to the Mayor signing it.
2. MOTORIZED VEHICLES ON THE BOARDWALK. 1100 -20081
Police Chief Klein discussed the different types of mobility devices that have been used on
the boardwalk and reported that only pedestrians, skaters, and bicyclists are permitted on
the boardwalk. He noted that it is difficult to conduct enforcement on some of the devices
due to its vehicle classification, but emphasized the need for education relative
to appropriate low -speed devices and boardwalk safety. He highlighted the types of
enforcement the Police Department has on the boardwalk. He discussed surrey cycles and
noted that there is only one company in the City that rents Segways.
In response to Council questions, Police Chief Klein confirmed that only sworn Police
Officers can issue citations and discussed issues related to citing for excessive speeds on the
boardwalk. He emphasized that all motorized devices are prohibited on the boardwalk,
except for Segways or devices used by the disabled. He confirmed officers have the
discretion to cite surrey cycles, but the operators probably won't be cited if they notify the
customers that they cannot ride on the boardwalk. Council Member Webb noted that the
Palm Street operator is storing the surreys on the sidewalk.
Council Member Rosansky joined the meeting at 4:14 p.m.
Laura Keen expressed concern about the excessive speeds that people travel on the
boardwalk because they could collide with small children. She hoped that the current codes
Volume 58 — Page 595
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
October 14, 2008
will be enforced
Regarding creating a sidewalk just for bicycles, discussion ensued relative to the placement
of the sidewalk in relation to the boardwalk, whether bicyclists would speed more if they
had their own sidewalk, and whether this would invite more traffic into the area.
Max Liskin believed that Segways are less offensive and recommended that the City enact
some type of passive enforcement, like speed bumps, cameras, and stop signs. He expressed
concerns relative to electric bicycles and provided a handout.
Dorothy Beek believed that the problems on the boardwalk relate to motorized vehicles and
lack of enforcement, and took issue with surreys. She recommended that boardwalk maps
indicate that the speed limit is 8 mph.
W. R. Dilby asked who handles the problem with parking surreys on the sidewalk and took
issue that this operator has a conditional use permit when it cannot comply with City
regulations.
Louise Fundenberg, President of the Central Newport Beach Community Association, read
their four policies regarding the boardwalk area. She encouraged aggressive police
enforcement.
Council Member Gardner suggested installing flashing speed signs to remind people of the 8
mph speed limit.
Council Member Henn commented that status quo is not acceptable and that change is
needed. He requested that a report come back to Council with a plan to conduct community
outreach and that business operators, as well as residents, should be invited to participate.
Council. Member Webb requested that code enforcement visit some of the surrey operators to
review what they're doing. He stated that the boardwalk should be called an ocean front
sidewalk to make it more obvious to bike renters.
S. UNDERGROUND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT STATUS REPORT AND GUIDING
PRINCIPLE REVIEW. (891100 -2008]
Deputy Public Works Director Webb provided handouts and utilized a PowerPoint
presentation to discuss the guiding principles for assessment methodology. He displayed a
map of the City's assessment districts. He confirmed that the assessment fee is initially
spread equally but then is altered depending on assessment benefits.
Joan Cox, Harris & Associates, discussed the benefit factors (safety, aesthetics, and
connection benefits) and how they play a part in determining the assessment amounts. She
noted that every assessment engineer has their own point of view on bow to assess benefits,
but will also work with the community when conducting their analysis. She emphasized
that there is a difference between enhanced views and aesthetics.
City Attorney Clauson highlighted Proposition 218 and indicated that the assessment
engineer is required to identify if there is a specific benefit to a property, and this amount
cannot generally be spread to other properties who may not receive the same benefit.
In response to Council questions, Deputy Public Works Director Webb indicated that the
guiding principles assist with the process, but limited resources and the cost of the
assessment district can delay pending projects. Eddie Marquez and Tony Matthis of
Southern California Edison (SCE) discussed staffing and resources, reasons for possible
delays in drawing up a district, how the tariff regulates who can design the projects, the
Volume 58 - Page 696
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
October 14, 2008
complexities of Rule 20, the difference between Rule 20A and Rule 20B, and the bidding
process and prevailing wage. Mark Rush of AT &T noted that their designs are based on
SCE designs and that they have the same tariff restrictions as SCE.
City Manager Bludau explained that the resident's cost for Assessment District 19 (Santa
Ana Heights - Mesa Drive /Cypress Street) was initially going to be funded by redevelopment
money, so no vote was taken. However, the County is now only going to pay for
undergrounding on public property. Since the project has changed, he indicated that the
residents will have a say as to whether they want their property undergrounded. Principal
Civil Engineer Sinacori added that the residents initially did not have due process or the
opportunity to protest the district.
W.R. Dilby noted that San Diego received an increase in its tariff amount and is using Rule
20B. He commended Senior Civil Engineer Lee for developing the guiding principles since it
is based on equal benefits. He cited the State Constitution and believed that
undergrounding is a general benefit and should be paid by the General Fund. He added
that he does not believe the City is required to pay prevailing wages, which SCE and the
City Attorney confirmed.
Bruce Brandenburg commended Senior Civil Engineer Lee for assisting with making
Assessment District 101 proceed smoothly and believed that the guiding principles were
developed as a result of what occurred with AD101. He agreed that the assessment
amounts should be based primarily on square footage and safety, not aesthetics.
Council Member Henn recommended that the policies be revised to make more clear that
differential benefit factors should only be used when there are compelling and material
differences between properties.
III. PUBLIC_COMMENTS -None.
IV. ADJW)KNMENT - 5:89 p.m
The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on October 8, 2008, at 2:15 p.m. on the
City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration
Building.
City Clerk
Mayor
Volume 58 - Page 597