Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/27/2001 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session February 27, 2001- 4:00 p.m. Present: Ridgeway, Proctor, Glover, Bromberg, Mayor Adams Absent: Heffernan (excused), O'Neil (excused) CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Regarding Agenda Item 5 (Janitorial and Related Services for Park and Beach Restroom Facilities), General Services Director Niederhaus reported that the cost of having two part -time employees conduct the janitorial services is $22,200 a year; the cost for a City employee on overtime is $46,000 a year; and the contract with A -1 Spinelli Enterprises would cost $33,400 a year. He indicated that 52 vendors were invited to bid on this and assured Council that staff made sure that the vendors understood their obligations. 2. CITY RECYCLING PROGRAM. General Services Director Niederhaus introduced Management Analyst Eldridge, Refuse Superintendent Russo, and Refuse Supervisor Hinckley and reported that they are currently recruiting for a Recycling Coordinator. Utilizing a PowerPoint presentation, he reviewed the history of the recycling program. He stated that in the early 1900s, recycling consisted of using burlap sacks for refuse and transporting food waste to agricultural facilities for pig feed. From 1950 to 1990, refuse was hauled to a variety of landfills. He discussed the transfer station that was built in 1988 and how it expanded the City's options for long haul transfers to Material Recovery Facilities (MRF). He reported that the City had a successful newspaper recycling program from 1973 to 1989 which generated between $35,000 to $62,000 a year. The program was stopped when the City began its full recycling program. Mr. Niederhaus reported that Assembly Bill 939, which deals with the national landfill shortage crisis, was adopted in November 1989. He indicated that, since it was predicted that Orange County landfills would be full by the mid - 1990x, cities needed to start conserving the current landfills through recycling programs. He added that some landfills were also built improperly and posed a continued health threat. He stated that California set a 25% recycling rate goal by December 31, 1995 and a 50% goal by December 31, 2000, and requires that cities first reduce solid waste through source reduction. He reported that AB 939 has provisions to fine local governments $10,000 a day for noncompliance, but noted that most of the fines have been issued for failure to submit a recycling plan. He added that Volume 54 - Page 116 INDEX Recycling Program (44) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes . February 27, 2001 INDEX AB 939 also requires that cities generate a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE). The City's SRRE includes a composting component, education/public information component, and a household hazardous waste component. He stated that the City also conducted a Waste Characterization Study which broke down the refuse into 14 categories. Mr. Niederhaus reported that businesses generate about 90,000 tons of waste a year and that this was initially managed through a solid waste permit. He indicated that waste is now managed through non - exclusive solid waste franchises in order to keep competition open. He stated that there are nine solid waste haulers and seven demolition haulers that currently operate in the City, and that they provide the City indemnification from environmental liability and the 25% and 50% recycling rate. Mr. Niederhaus reported that the City has a five year contract with CRT to recycle 25% of the residential waste. Further, solid waste permits were issued to all the private haulers with the requirement that they recycle 5% to 25% of the waste. He stated that the Recycling Element was completed in 1991 and that the City required its parks maintenance contractor to recycle all the greenwaste. He added that the City has also had a used oil recycling program since 1997. Mr. Niederhaus explained what happens to residential trash once it is picked up and noted that residents are not required to break down materials since the City ultimately takes the waste to a mixed waste recycling facility that sorts it. He reported that commercial haulers are required to process materials from residents and demolition sites, and added that wood waste is also recycled. Mr. Niederhaus indicated that the City's recycling rate was 42% in 1995 and 47% in 1999, and that these figures were generated by a complicated formula that differs from the City's records. He added that the City will not know if it met the 50% diversion rate goal for 2000 until May /June 2001. He reported that, if the City does not reach its 50% diversion rate goal, Senate Bill 1066 allows cities to request a five year extension. Mr. Niederhaus stated that solid waste operation options include converting to an automated collection system, hauling waste by rail to desert area landfills, and using alternate fuel refuse collection vehicles. He reported that AQMD Rule 1193 mandates that any vehicle purchased for refuse collection after July 31, 2001 use alternate fuel. He added that the 10 year review for non - exclusive franchises will occur in 2005 and noted that the City is collecting 16% of the net proceeds ($400,000 a year) from all commercial solid waste operations. Mr. Niederhaus expressed concern with businesses bypassing the recycling requirements and franchise fees. He indicated that the City is working with the County to identify who is doing this and believed that the offenders are mostly demolition contractors, landscapers, and roofers. He stated that they are working with the Building Department on tightening the City's demolition permit process and will also be monitoring the franchise haulers as soon as a Recycling Coordinator is hired. Volume 54 - Page 117 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 27, 2001 In response to Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway's questions, Mr. Niederhaus expressed the opinion that it is impossible to recycle 50% of the waste stream, especially food waste from commercial sites. Regarding education, he indicated that their annual education materials request that residents separate its wet materials (dog droppings and food waste) so the waste is not contaminated. He added that the CRT is required to produce new brochures annually and that they are also sent to new homeowners. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway suggested that the City distribute education material on a quarterly basis. Mr. Niederhaus indicated that he is not aware of a demand for non- consumable food products and confirmed that more than 60% of food waste is not being recycled. He stated that the shortfall in recycled food waste is made up through the recycling of concrete, asphalt, and wood that is crushed to make road base. He reported that, if the City meets the 50% goal, it will look at new programs to educate businesses on separating food waste. Mr. Niederhaus noted that 44% of the properties in the City are rental properties and that it would be difficult to educate them on the City's recycling program. He indicated that it makes sense to convert to an automated trash pickup system because of the savings, but pointed out that this would not work in areas like the Peninsula since the containers are large. City Manager Bludau stated that the large containers are also difficult for the elderly to maneuver. Council Member Glover added that the containers are unattractive. Regarding food waste, Council Member Heffernan stated that the Orange County Food Bank has petitioned for a building with dining accommodations at El Toro in order to put in a recycling kitchen. He indicated that 90% of the restaurant foods could be recycled at the facility and passed out after it is flash - frozen. This would be done under a Federal job training program that is paid for by the Federal government. In response to Council Member Proctor's question, Mr. Niederhaus stated that cities, like Irvine, that have residents separate its waste into bins have a 10% to 15% lower recycling rate than Newport Beach. He added that he could arrange a tour for Council to the Huntington Beach or Stanton MRF. In response to Mayor Adams' questions, Mr. Niederhaus reported that they relay contamination - related issues via a public service announcement on cable. He also indicated that separating the various types of restaurant waste is done by the individual haulers and that they continually compete for each other's business. He added that the haulers conduct a waste audit to assist the businesses on better recycling practices. 3. PROPOSED HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT. Senior Planner Alford reported that Council extended the term of the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee to allow them to complete their work on the proposed Harbor and Bay Element. He reviewed the Element's five goals that are outlined in the staff report and added that the Element also includes a number of proposed objectives, policies, and implementing strategies that need to be discussed during a public hearing. Council Member Glover Volume 54 - Page 118 NI-I x7 GPA 2000 -2/ Harbor and Bay Element (45) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 27, 2001 INDEX suggested holding Town Hall meetings on this issue, Mariner's Mile businesses. Mayor Adams reported that the General Plan Update Committee will be recommending that Council proceed with a visioning process that may take about 12 months and added that a formal update of specific Elements will then be conducted after this. He believed that hearings on the proposed Element can proceed and then be subject to review and refinement into the General Plan Update. He expressed the opinion that this would lose momentum if Council waited for the General Plan Update process. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the Harbor Committee has been meeting for over two years. He believed that the document is a well drafted policy document, not a specific document, and expressed hope that Council moves forward on this as a separate document from the General Plan. He reported that no city in the country has a Harbor Element as part of its General Plan. Council Member Bromberg noted that the Bay is the City's backyard and faces many challenges daily. He stated that he is in favor of moving forward and believed it should be one of the City's highest priorities. He requested that a Town Hall meeting also be conducted on Balboa Island since it is surrounded by the Bay. In response to Council Member Heffernan's question, Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the Harbor Committee would like to become a Commission, but believed that they intend to get the Element in place first. He emphasized that he does not want the Committee to disband and noted that language has been prepared for a subsequent Council meeting that would change the Committee into a Commission. Council Member Heffernan expressed concern relative to the Ardell property being on the market and the chance that whoever buys the property may be expecting to use the property for something other than a Harbor use. Council Member Glover believed this is not a concern since the property has been on the market for over 11 years. Mayor Adams stated that there is consensus to move this forward independent of the General Plan process. However, he expressed concern relative to the formation of a Commission due to the relationship it may have to the Planning Commission and since it may add another level of bureaucracy to City government. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway believed that a Harbor Commission could look at issues concerning eel grass, clean water, the Back Bay, bulkhead construction, sand erosion, etc. He stated that Council may not need to engage in these issues and that these issues are beyond the purview of the Planning Commission. Seymour Beek, 528 South Bay Front, Chairman of the Harbor Committee, stated that the composition of the Committee is diverse and all of the major interests around the Bay have been well represented. He believed that the proposed Element is a document that has been worked over thoroughly. Regarding forming a Harbor Commission, he pointed out that the Harbor Committee has already looked at issues concerning moorings, dredging, eel grass, anchorages, Bay access, docks, entertainment and charter boats, Bay Volume 54 - Page 119 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 27, 2001 INDEX animals, marine construction equipment storage, pumpout stations, boater information, and storm clean -ups. John Corrough, 1004 South Bay Front, stated that he is on the Harbor Committee and is a consultant in these types of issues. He referenced the staff report that lists the 13 interests the Committee represents and stated that everyone has overlapped in five or more interests. He reported that Newport Beach is the only city in California with a water resource but no commission, and noted that this poses a disadvantage when the Committee tries to engage other governmental agencies for loans, grants, and other types of support. He added that the City also needs to get back money that is being allocated to other cities, like the pennies on every gallon of gas or diesel that is sold in the Harbor. He concluded by stating that the proposed Harbor and Bay Element is a winner and thanked Senior Planner Alford and City Attorney Burnham for all their assistance. Council Member Glover added that they could really help the City with the Local Coastal Plan. Lee Sutherland, 1401 North Bay Front, stated that there are a lot of issues that only apply to the Bay and noted that they could act in an advisory capacity to the Planning Commission or Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, and help and support the Harbor Resources Division. He reported that the composition of the Committee is broad and included several members from Mariner's Mile. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway added that environmentalists were also involved in this process. He expressed hope that this moves forward to the Planning Commission or Council and agreed that more debate should be conducted so everyone's interests are addressed. Mr. Alford noted that the General Plan Amendment has been initiated by the Planning Commission and Council, and that a proper means of notification and public outreach needs to be determined if something more than public hearings are to be conducted. He stated that the City will probably need to generate a negative declaration. Mayor Adams suggested that the Committee discuss the outreach program process and come back to Council with recommendations at the next regular meeting. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway noted that the Harbor Committee is meeting tomorrow morning and expressed hope that the workshops could be conducted concurrently with moving this forward. Mayor Adams congratulated the Committee for producing this document and indicated that they made a good case for the formation of a Commission. Council Member Heffernan asked if the Harbor and Bay Element deals with specific uses and potential changes of uses. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway pointed out that the Element is a strong policy document to maintain the Harbor as it exists and reported that the Committee added language which allows the City to buy a conservation easement, particularly for the boatyards, to prevent the conversion of the entire Harbor into a residential community. John Corrough added that the Element encourages the market place to utilize various techniques for the mixed uses so that the unique waterfront is sustained and enhanced. Mr. Beek noted that a draft Element was reviewed by Council about a year ago and that the current draft has been watered -down because the previous Council had concerns that it was too restrictive and interfered with the Bay Front owners' property rights to Volume 54 - Page 120 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 27, 2001 change the use. Council Member Glover believed that it would be in the best interest of the City to make it a goal to help people understand that Mariner's Mile is a water community. Assistant City Manager Wood believed that one of the keys to the Harbor and Bay Element policies and the City's ability to implement them is making it an Element in the General Plan since State law requires that all the General Plan Elements be consistent with one another. Mr. Alford indicated that there are no apparent inconsistencies between the Harbor and Bay Element and other General Plan Elements. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT - 5:35 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on February 21, 2001, at 2:48 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk i � � Wf"wk� Recording Secretary ..0,�'T �--7,7 Mayor Volume 54 - Page 121 INDEX