HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/12/2021 - Study Session / Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
I. ROLL CALL - 4:00 p.m.
Present: Mayor Brad Avery, Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Muldoon, Council Member Noah Blom, Council
Member Joy Brenner (via Zoom), Council Member Diane Dixon, Council Member Duffy
Duffield, Council Member Will O'Neill
II. CURRENT BUSINESS
SS1. Clarification of Items on the Consent Calendar
Council Member O'Neill announced he would propose dissolving the Inter -City Liaison
Committee under Item 9 (Annual Mayoral Appointments) since the committee has not met.
Regarding Item 9, Council Member Dixon believed she should be the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) representative since she has been appointed to the SCAG
Regional Council.
SS2. Marine Activities Permits
Council Member Duffield recused himself due to business interest conflicts.
Assistant City Manager Jacobs utilized a presentation to discuss Newport Harbor as a shared
resource, stakeholder groups, Marine Activities Permits (MAP), the Harbor Commission's
review of Title 17. 10, areas of focus, activities that would require a MAP, permit conditions, new
versus existing nonconforming activities, and noted a correction on the staff report regarding
fees for MAPS and violations.
In response to Council Member questions, Assistant City Manager Jacobs advised that new
businesses will have to comply with parking requirements, but existing businesses may continue
operating with its existing parking, stated that Council may amend parking requirements
contained in the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), and noted there are four kinds of
MAPS, each business will be analyzed for parking requirements, and the City will be named as
an additional insured. City Attorney Harp advised that Section 17.10.060.A allows the
imposition of additional conditions, stated that naming the City as an additional insured could
result in some cost to the business owner, noted that the Municipal Code currently allows the
Risk Manager to set policy limits, and the Risk Manager will set the requirements similar to
other cities' requirements and conduct due diligence, and indicated that, currently, insurance
requirements are imposed on entities operating with a permit; however, under the new
provision, insurance requirements will be imposed on anyone operating in the Harbor.
Council Member O'Neill noted the analysis is significantly different for a charter boat business
than a stand-up paddle board business, a sector approach/analysis will be needed for each new
business, and expressed concern that the insurance requirement is delegated to the City's Risk
Manager.
Mayor Avery believed most charter boats in the Harbor have insurance, adding an insured does
not incur an additional cost, and stated that all marinas require that type of insurance.
Council Member Blom was concerned about the regulatory wording that allows one person to
determine insurance requirements.
Council Member Dixon suggested using language regarding insurance that reflects market
conditions in other harbor jurisdictions.
Volume 64 - Page 593
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Council Member Blom requested the inclusion of a right to appeal.
Council Member O'Neill proposed language to allow a review by the Harbormaster, whose
decision is appealable to the Harbor Commission.
Assistant City Manager Jacobs continued the presentation noting additional conditions for
existing businesses.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Assistant City Manager Jacobs related that
the Newport Dunes' dock is located on County property and confirmed that businesses renting
hydro -foil surfboards will need MAPs.
Mayor Avery indicated hydro -foil surfboards are not rented, believed that, for years, the County
patrolled the Harbor but did not do any code enforcement, and stated that this would be an
opportunity for the Harbormaster and staff to get to know everyone and recognize new
operators.
Assistant City Manager Jacobs concluded the presentation by detailing the next steps.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon's questions, Assistant City Manager Jacobs stated code
enforcement officers would determine existing businesses that are not exempt, with their
decision appealable to the Harbormaster and the Harbormaster's decision appealable to the
Harbor Commission. She further stated that an existing business can be defined as a business
operating as of the date the ordinance becomes effective, and noted that an existing business
that is not required to obtain a MAP does not have to comply with parking requirements.
Community Development Director Jurjis reported that planning staff will work with the Harbor
Department to determine the parking requirement for new businesses and noted that there is
no parking requirement for a paddle board business. Assistant City Manager Jacobs indicated
that a new business can provide offsite parking to fulfill the requirement.
Council Member Blom stated that recreation services are useful to the community, but requiring
a new business to provide parking where there is none may shut down operations in the future,
and believed a parking requirement for human -powered vessel operators is not a huge concern.
Council Member Dixon clarified that MAPs do not pertain to recreational use but to a
commercial operation.
Mayor Avery noted that some temporary operators launch from street ends and public beaches,
which is not allowed, permanent operators pay rent and dock fees, and short-term lodgers want
to rent surfboards, paddle boards, and Duffy boats while staying on the islands.
Jim Mosher discussed the corrected and redline versions of the ordinance, enacting laws that
are clearly written, the lack of specific parking requirements and MAP categories, and the lack
of clarity in Section 17.10.020.
Harbor Commission Chair Kenney indicated that a Harbor attendance study has been
conducted, the Harbor Commission separated businesses into four sectors so that each could
have special conditions, Balboa Island residents have complained significantly regarding
commercial operations usurping parking, all large commercial operators are required to provide
parking either onsite or offsite, existing businesses supported the proposed changes during
outreach meetings, and naming the City as an additional insured is intended to protect the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon proposed Council Members discuss MAP categories for yacht clubs,
fuel docks, the Catalina Flyer, sailing schools, and boat rentals. Assistant City Manager Jacobs
explained that fuel docks do not operate in the Harbor but on land, and the Catalina Flyer has
a MAP. Mayor Avery proposed requiring a MAP if a yacht club rents small vessels to its
members and if sailing schools charge students a fee.
Volume 64 - Page 594
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
City Attorney Harp clarified that the clean version of the ordinance provided in the packet is
the correct version.
SS3. Mariners and Dover Shores Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study
Traffic Engineer Brine utilized a presentation to discuss the process outlined in City Council
Policy L-26, the study area, details of community outreach and the study, treatments for seven
key streets, a summary of traffic study findings, a map of the proposed project, the proposed
traffic calming project, a typical plan, various types of speed cushions, and an example of
edgeline striping.
Council Member O'Neill expressed a concern about paying for rubber speed cushions with the
potential of having to remove them at a later date. In response to his questions, Traffic Engineer
Brine advised that staff did not.look at striping chokers, short segments of edgeline striping are
not effective, the rubber speed cushion does not address police vehicles, and added that vehicles
parked around cushions may cause bicyclists to travel further into the roadway.
Traffic Engineer Brine continued the presentation by discussing staff working with residents to
ensure the locations of speed cushions do not cause disturbances, the widths of Santiago and
Dover Drives, the neighborhood petition process, and percentages of resident support.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Traffic Engineer Brine indicated resident
interest in the project increased after the fatal accident that occurred in July 2020.
Traffic Engineer Brine concluded the presentation highlighting cost estimates, striping on
Polaris Drive, proposed recommendations to Item 14, and consideration of a comprehensive
project to prevent traffic from shifting to a different street in the neighborhood.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon believed Council has enough knowledge of the neighborhood to know
where the hot spots are and where there is no support, and recommended taking Polaris Drive
off the table to have 15 cushions instead of 17 in the area. Traffic Engineer Brine explained that
striping will decrease traffic speeds, but not as much as traffic cushions, and with the higher
speeds found in this neighborhood, cushions will be more effective than striping alone. He added
that chokers are another option for speed reduction, but they are not as effective as cushions
and reduce the availability of on -street parking. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon indicated that he
preferred chokers and believed center medians reduce speeds less than cushions.
Council Member Duffield advised that this neighborhood is located in his district and this idea
surfaced long before the accident, noted his support and respect for staffs work, stated his
surprise that not more people supported this effort, and hoped Council moves forward with the
traffic calming measures.
An unidentified speaker related his submittal of a letter, highlighted the increase in traffic
speeds, volumes, and distracted driving, and noted that only 12% of drivers along Highland
Drive comply with the speed limit, which is not acceptable.
Derek Landry noted door-to-door contact to obtain signatures on the petition was impossible
during the pandemic, so residents created an e -petition, and stated that, although this effort
may not change unsafe behavior, it may garner more support for options other than speed
cushions.
Jim Mosher inquired about the effects of traffic calming on the Police Department's and Fire
Department's response times, the Police Department's support for speed cushions, and a
comparison of speeds in other similar neighborhoods. He expressed concern that speed cushions
may be a hazard for bicycles, especially at night, believed that striping is needed and speed
cushions are more controversial, and noted alternate routes for drivers to avoid speed cushions.
Volume 64 - Page 595
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Amy Von Der Ahe thanked Council for considering traffic calming for the neighborhood and
urged Council to install cushions and other measures.
Jim Hartung supported the general objective of calming traffic speeds, but not the use of painted
lines since drivers might not be able to see around corners, and noted that neighbors have
expressed concerns about noise and the impact of speed cushions on the value of their homes.
Elyse Avila Smith noted an elementary school is located at the end of Mariners Drive, believed
a speed cushion is needed on that street, and asked Council to approve the measures.
Paul Dambroso believed the cost does not relate to the loss of life, invited Council to Highland
Drive on a weekend to observe speeding and its impact on the neighborhood, and stated the
same old things will have the same results.
Glenda Lewis opposed using speed cushions, indicated the Police Department does not patrol
the neighborhood anymore, preferred trying the edgeline striping, and believed young children
riding electric bikes are a problem.
Chris Bugler related that, in the last five years, traffic has been noticeably aggressive and faster
and believed that something needs to be done to address this issue.
Dan Collins supported traffic calming efforts and asked if engineers could develop a design
better than speed bumps, maybe a swale or double speed bump.
Council Member Dixon noted this is the second time in six years that Council has listened to a
community/family that has lost a child on City streets, stated that the City is still trying to solve
the issue in Newport Heights, and now there is a second tragedy, indicated that the Police
Department has asked for additional traffic officers, but Council has denied the request, and
believed police need to be visible. She stated that Council Member Brenner talked about forming
a planning and traffic safety committee, but Council put the burden on staff to conduct studies,
and believed the City needs a holistic system for keeping high -traffic areas safer, perhaps a
combination of policing, better signage, and physical changes similar to Bayside Drive. Council
Member Dixon supported what Council needs to do and hoped to look at adding traffic officers
during the budget process.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon stated that it has been universally established that striping is good,
stated that drivers may not register the area as a residential neighborhood because of the older
design, preferred medians at the entryways, and supported striping everywhere and placing
speed cushions on streets with 60% or more support.
In response to questions from Council, Traffic Engineer Brine indicated speed cushions reduce
speeds more effectively than chokers or medians because cushions are a physical change for
drivers and because the number of driveways reduces the effectiveness of chokers and medians,
noted that existing asphalt speed bumps and rubber speed cushions are designed to reduce
traffic speed to 25 miles per hour, and added that staff collects speed data before and after traffic
calming measures are installed to determine the true benefit of the measures.
Council Member Brenner recalled requesting the formation of a traffic affairs commission,
advised that she will continue to request this at every opportunity, suggested a phased approach
in order to avoid making traffic on other streets worse, and emphasized that the primary concern
is safety.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Craig Sheets used a presentation to comment regarding missiles pointed at offshore oil wells, guns,
nuclear freight containers, water supplies, illegal drugs, and judicial courts.
Volume 64 - Page 596
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Paige Lynch supported safety for senior citizens and children, objected to speed cushions, and supported
striping or median strips.
Denys Oberman addressed the use of amplified sound without a permit, specifically a skating business
holding events at the Newport Elementary playground on Sunday afternoons, and asked Council to
direct staff to enforce ordinances.
IV. CLOSED SESSION - Council Chambers Conference Room
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Government Code § 54957.6): 1 matter
Agency Designated Representative (s): Will O'Neill, Council Member; and Diane Dixon, Council
Member
Unrepresented Employees: Grace K. Leung, City Manager; Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney; and
Leilam I. Brown, City Clerk
V. RECESSED - 6:36 p.m.
VI. RECONVENED AT 6:59 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING
VII. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Brad Avery, Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Muldoon, Council Member Noah Blom, Council
Member Joy Brenner (via Zoom), Council Member Diane Dixon, Council Member Duffy
Duffield, Council Member Will O'Neill
VIII. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Harp announced that no reportable actions were taken.
IX. INVOCATION - Council Member O'Neill
X. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council Member Duffield
Without objection, Mayor Avery requested that Item 10 be discussed at this time.
XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. Ordinance Nos. 2021-1 and 2021-2: Land Use Entitlement Applications for the Residences
at 4400 Von Karman Project (PA2020-061) (C-7904-2) [381100-2021]
Council Member O'Neill recused himself due to his membership at the Pacific Club located
at 4110 MacArthur Boulevard.
Mayor Avery reported that the applicant has requested a continuance to the January 26, 2021 City
Council meeting.
Motion by Council Member Dixon seconded by Council Member Duffield, to continue the
item to the January 26, 2021 City Council meeting.
With Council Member O'Neill recusing himself, the motion carried 6-0
XI. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
Volume 64 - Page 597
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
XII. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ORAL REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON
COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES
Council Member Brenner:
• Announced the winners of the holiday contests sponsored by the Corona del Mar Chamber of
Commerce, Business Improvement District (BID) and the Corona del Mar Residents Association
(CdMRA)
• Used a slide to announce a Town Hall in her district on January 21, 2021 at 5:00 p.m.
Council Member O'Neill:
• Participated in a fundraiser on KOCI radio and was joined by the Fire Chief, Police Chief, and
Newport Harbor High School Principal Sean Boulton
• Announced a Transportation Corridor Authority (TCA) board meeting on January 14, 2021 to
discuss leadership positions
Council Member Dixon:
• Noted short-term lodging and solid waste matters are upcoming
• Announced her appointment to Southern California Association of Government's (SLAG) Regional
Council for Orange County and the Community and Economic Development and Housing
Subcommittees
Council Member Blom:
• Announced he is looking forward to the committee appointments
• Expressed pride in the community coming together over the holidays
Council Member Duffield:
• Announced the Boat Parade was awesome and safe, and hoped the grassroots Boat Parade
continued
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon:
• Congratulated Mario Marovic for acquiring Muldoon's Irish Pub
Mayor Avery:
• Utilized a slide to announce a shredding event on January 23, 2021
XIII. MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ASKED TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE
AGENDA
• Consideration of a study session to review the parking regulations within the Municipal
Code and consideration of designating certain areas within the City as Activity Nodes
[O'Neill]
The City Council unanimously concurred to bring the item back at a future meeting.
• Consideration of a study session to discuss (1) simplifying the parking requirement for
food service uses / restaurants, (2) parking overlay districts in parking impacted zones
for broader analysis of available public parking in determining parking requirements
for new business, and (3) allowing valet parking drop-off on public rights-of-way for
individual business or joint business use [O'Neill]
With Council Member Blom recusing himself due to business interest conflicts, the City Council
voted 6-0 to bring the item back at a future meeting.
XIV. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR
Volume 64 - Page 598
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Council Member O'Neill proposed disbanding the Inter -City Liaison Committee under Item 9 (Annual
Mayoral Appointments) due to lack of use.
City Clerk Brown advised that the Balboa Village Advisory Committee (BVAC) expired December 31,
2020, and will need to be removed from Item 9.
Council Member Dixon proposed she serve as the City's representative to Southern California
Association of Governments (SLAG) with Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon as the alternate under Item 9.
Dennis Bress urged Council to support Item 7 (Professional Services Agreement with Carpi & Clay, Inc.
for Federal Advocacy Services (C-8542-2)) because the City needs help solving the airplane noise issue,
and stated that a noise abatement profile has been determined to reduce noise by 75-150%.
XV. CONSENT CALENDAR
READING OF MINUTES AND ORDINANCES
1. Minutes for the December 8, 2020 City Council Regular Meeting and the December 18,
2020 City Council Special Meeting [100-2021]
Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as amended, and order filed.
2. Reading of Ordinances
Waive reading in full of all ordinances under consideration, and direct the City Clerk to read by title
only.
RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
3. Resolution No. 2021-1: Updating the List of Designated Employees for 2021 Under the
City's Conflict of Interest Code [100-20211
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-1, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Adopting an Updated Designated Employees List for 2021.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
Street Pavement Repair Program — Award of Contract No. 7929-1 (21R03) [381100-20211
a) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15301(c), Class 1 (maintenance of existing public facilities involving negligible or no
expansion of use) of the CEQA Guidelines, because this project has no potential to have a
significant effect on the environment;
b) Approve the project plans and specifications;
c) Award Contract No. 7929-1 to PALP Inc., dba Excel Paving Company, for the total bid price of
$323,938, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract; and
d) Establish a contingency of $81,000 (approximately 25 percent of total bid) to cover the cost of
additional pavement rehabilitation areas and/or unforeseen work not included in the original
contract.
5. Professional Services Agreement with SRG Geoscience, Inc. for Geotechnical Plan
Review Services for One Year (C-8657-1) [381100-20211
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with SRG
Geoscience, Inc. for a total of $240,000.
Volume 64 - Page 599
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
6. Lease Extension of Groundwater Pipeline with Orange County Water District (C-2853)
[381100-2021]
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly;
b) Approve Amendment No. One to the Agreement with the Orange County Water District
regarding the lease of a water pipeline for water transmission purposes, extending the lease
term by 25 years to September 22, 2047; and
c) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No. One to this Agreement.
7. Professional Services Agreement with Carpi & Clay, Inc. for Federal Advocacy Services
(C-8542-2) [381100-2021]
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Approve the Professional Services Agreement with Carpi & Clay, Inc. of Washington, D.C., for
federal advocacy services for an initial, approximately two-year term, ending
December 31, 2022, with two optional one-year extensions and a total not to exceed amount of
$458,400, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon and Council Member O'Neill voted "no" on, Item 7.
MISCELLANEOUS
8. Budget Amendment to Accept a Check from the California State Library for Literacy
Services (CLLS) and Appropriate Funds to the Library's FY 2020-21 Budget [100-2021]
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Accept a check in the amount of $40,500 from the California State Library for Literacy Services
(CLLS) and approve Budget Amendment No. 21-023 to increase expenditures by the same
amount in the Literacy accounts.
9. Annual Mayoral Appointments [241100-2021]
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Confirm Mayor Brad Avery's amended appointments under City Council Policy A-2.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon seconded by Council Member O'Neill, to approve the
Consent Calendar; and noting the amendments to Items 1 and 9, and noting the "no" votes to Item 7 by
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon and Council Member O'Neill.
The motion carried unanimously.
XVI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR — None
XVII. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
Jim Mosher commented that the General Aviation Improvement Program (GAIP) for JWA achieved a
number of concessions, including commercial flights operating from the main terminal, and stated that
JetSuiteX filed a lawsuit objecting to the restriction, the Board of Supervisors voted to delete the
restriction earlier today, and the City did not defend the restriction.
Volume 64 - Page 600
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
City Attorney Harp reported that plans from both Fixed -Base Operators (FBO) do not include a
terminal, both FBOs have committed not to pursue commercial service from their facilities, and ACI Jet
is in the process of removing JetSuiteX from the public facility.
XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. Ordinance Nos. 2021-1 and 2021-2: Land Use Entitlement Applications for the Residences
at 4400 Von Karman Project (PA2020-061) (C-7904-2) [38/100-2021]
Item 10 was discussed after the Pledge of Allegiance.
11. Resolution No. 2021-4: 944 Via Lido Nord Residential Dock Reconfiguration — Call for
Review of Harbor Commission's Decision [100-2021]
Administrative Manager Miller announced that the applicant and Pete Swift are in attendance. He
utilized a presentation to discuss the location of the property, City Council Policy H-1, the Harbor
Commission's decision, the configuration of the existing and proposed docks, a photograph with
relevant project, bulkhead, and pierhead lines, a photograph of a project previously approved by the
Council at 939 Via Lido Soud, and a map of properties to which staff provided notice.
Council Member O'Neill noted the Harbor Commission cannot unilaterally waive City Council Policy
H-1, suggested the Harbor Commission, when reviewing City Council Policy H-1, should also
consider if it makes sense to approve vessels extending beyond the project line, and stated that he
did not oppose the proposed dock configuration.
In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, Administrative Manager Miller advised that the
Harbor Commission considered the vessel extending 20 feet beyond the pierhead line because the
rules allow that, indicated that decades ago Council made exceptions for docks to extend beyond the
pierhead line in many locations of the Harbor, confirmed that the distance will not impact the
navigable channel, noted that the homeowner could dredge in order to bring the dock closer to the
seawall, the proposed configuration will not affect federal dredging, and believed that a Harbor
Commission review of City Council Policy H-1 and consideration of other options would be wise.
Palmer Luckey, applicant, indicated that the proposed dock will have less square footage and extend
to the same point as neighboring docks, the existing dock does not comply with current
requirements, the 20 -foot restriction is acceptable, and dredging to bring the dock closer to the
seawall will affect the neighbor's seawall.
Pete Swift supported the project, noted the existing permitted dock was drawn as built but with
7 feet missing and has not been moved or altered, the proposed dock will not extend further than
the existing dock and will not affect other vessels' navigation, and requested Council approve the
application.
Mayor Avery opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, he closed the public
hearing.
Council Member Duffield indicated that many nonconforming docks exist in the Harbor and
expressed confidence in the Harbor Commission.
Council Member Brenner believed City Council Policy H-1 should be revised since Council has
provided exceptions for its own policy and expressed support for referring it to the Harbor
Commission.
Mayor Avery indicated that early homeowners built docks before regulations were promulgated and
Council cannot take back what the homeowner paid for, the existing dock was built 7 feet further
than it should have been, the City has new tools that ensure docks are built as planned, the vessel
could extend 30 feet into the Bay with a side -tie, and he has no issue with the applicant's request.
Volume 64 - Page 601
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
In response to Mayor Avery's question, Administrative Manager Miller confirmed that a vessel with
a 30 -foot beam could extend out 30 feet if it fits within the site property line.
Council Member Duffield advised that differences around the Harbor affect the length a dock may
extend.
Motion by Council Member Duffield, seconded by Council Member Dixon, to a) find the
project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 15301
(Existing Facilities) and Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines,
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; c) affirm the Harbor Commission's approval of the proposed
dock reconfiguration at 944 Via Lido Nord and authorize staff to issue an Approval in Concept for
the project; and d) adopt Resolution No. 2021-4, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Newport Beach, California, Upholding the Harbor Commission's Approval of an `Approval in
Concept"for a Residential Dock Reconstruction Project at the Property Located at 944 Via Lido Nord
(File No. 1901-2020).
The motion carried unanimously.
XIX. CURRENT BUSINESS
12. Harbor Commission Proposed Goals and Objectives for 2021 [100-20211
Council Member Duffield recused himself due to business interest conflicts.
Assistant City Manager Jacobs reported that the Harbor Commission has sought Council approval
of its workplan for many years and commended the Commissioners for accomplishing a tremendous
amount of work.
Harbor Commission Chair Kenney advised that the Commission is focused on the issues reflected
in the Goals and Objectives.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Chair Kenney indicated the Charter amendment
does not change the way the Harbor Commission operates.
Jim Mosher suggested Council encourage the Harbor Commission to look into the problem of people
modifying dock configurations without permits and recommend a pertinent policy.
Dennis Bress advocated for the creation of a position dedicated to all things related to John Wayne
Airport (JWA), including review of all departures.
Motion by Council Member Dixon, seconded by Council Member O'Neill, to a) determine
this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections
15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical
change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) approve the Harbor Commission's Goals
and Objectives for 2021 as presented in Attachment A of the staff report.
With Council Member Duffield recusing himself, the motion carried 6-0.
13. Ordinance No. 2021-3: Amending Chapter 17.10 (Marine Activities Permit) of Title 17
(Harbor Code) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Other Related Provisions [100-
20211
Council Member Duffield recused himself due to business interest conflicts.
Assistant City Manager Jacobs answered questions from the Study Session related to requirements
for businesses to obtain a MAP, encouragement for patrons to utilize rideshare services, operations
from the Newport Dunes' dock, locations of public restrooms in the Harbor, the parking standard
for paddle board operators, MAPS for sailing schools and yacht clubs, and liability insurance limits.
Volume 64 - Page 602
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
In response to Council Members' questions, Assistant City Manager Jacobs estimated that 20-30
businesses should, but do not, have MAPs under existing code provisions and 20-70 businesses will
be exempt from obtaining MAPs. She stated that the 20-70 businesses currently operating and are
exempt from obtaining MAPs will be grandfathered under the proposed Code revisions, confirmed
that staff will use business licenses, lease agreements, and internet searches to determine if existing
businesses are grandfathered and contact those that need to obtain MAPs, and added that if
businesses do not comply with new regulations, a new code provision will remove them from the
grandfathering process. City Attorney Harp added that businesses eligible for grandfathering will
need to have a business license.
Council Member O'Neill utilized a presentation to propose amendments to Section 17.10.120.B and
Section 17.10.070 related to due process and insurance, respectively, and requested the four MAP
categories return to Council as a receive -and -file item.
Mayor Avery related that 6 pack operators are more common than 12 pack operators, 6 -pack
operators are required to have a Coast Guard license, many owners operate 6 -pack boats as a part-
time job or hobby, and operating a 12 -pack business as a hobby is not financially feasible.
Jim Mosher believed the proposed ordinance needs more work, Council is approving the clean
version in the staff report, Section 17.70.020 does not contain any changes, and the entity that can
apply for a MAP is confusing. He inquired if some businesses may need more than one MAP, whether
revocation of a MAP disqualifies the applicant from a future MAP, and stated that the code does not
require anyone to register anywhere.
City Attorney Harp proposed a revision to Section 17.70.020.A-1.
Motion by Council Member O'Neill seconded by Council Member Dixon, to a) determine
this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections
15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical
change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) waive full reading, read by title only, introduce
amended Ordinance No. 2021-3, An Ordinance of the City Council of Newport Beach, California,
Amending Title 17.10 Marine Activities Permits of Title 17 (Harbor Code) of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code and Other Related Provisions, and pass to second reading on January 26, 2021; and
direct staff to bring back future MAPs to Council as a receive -and -file item.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon indicated he cannot support the item because of the grandfather provision.
Council Member Brenner expressed concern regarding the issues Mr. Mosher raised and suggested
staff clarify the issues and return to Council for approval.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Council Member O'Neill explained that the future
Study Sessions regarding parking requirements pertain to specific areas of the City that do not
include the Harbor. City Attorney Harp advised that Council may request a future agenda item
regarding parking requirements for Harbor -related businesses.
With Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon voting "no" and Council Member Duffield recusing
himself, the motion carried 5-1.
14. Mariners and Dover Shores Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study [100-20211
Traffic Engineer Brine provided an overview of the Study Session presentation, including City
Council Policy L-26, the study area, the study and timeline, traffic study findings, the proposed
project minus traffic calming measures on Polaris Drive, examples of traffic calming measures, the
petition process and support by street, a cost estimate, and proposed recommendations.
Volume 64 - Page 603
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Mayor Avery reported that Council discussed traffic calming during the Study Session and received
input from many residents.
Anne Ventura noted transient vehicles drive recklessly through the neighborhood with no regard
for children and animals, asked Council to consider speed cushions and testing a smart signal at
Highland Drive and Irvine Avenue, and indicated that people avoid the traffic signal by using
Commodore Road.
Tiffany advised that her family noticed the number of speeding vehicles shortly after moving into
the neighborhood and that speeding is not safe for anyone.
Noelle Perrin perceived that traffic safety measures would never pass, but neighbors will not give
up, and pleaded with Council to make changes.
Murphy McCann believed the streets in Dover Shores are designed for cars to speed, the design
contributes to the problem, believed the people opposing speed cushions are the ones speeding, noted
that sports cars and speed bumps get along just fine in Emerald Bay, and stated that the
homeowners where speed cushions will be installed support the project.
Derek Landry indicated the 70% requirement in the policy for support is a guideline, 60% support
during a pandemic is good, and this situation does not need to continue for another 10 or 20 years.
Lisa Ackley concurred with prior comments, advised that many neighbors support using speed
cushions, and believed there was no reason to delay.
Craig Perreault remarked that he has seen many speeding cars and close calls, Highland Drive is
unique in the neighborhood because of the percentage of drivers traveling at an extreme rate of
speed, there is a need for roadways to be adjusted, and neighbors want this solution because it will
make the neighborhood safer.
Jason Ward supported the project and encouraged Council to amend City Council Policy L-26.
Charles Klobe believed that Mr. Brine's outreach has adhered to Council Policy, believed the position
of a majority of residents should prevail, and suggested that the addition of stop signs may be a low-
cost way to slow traffic.
Jim Castova recalled the opposition to speed bumps on 161h Street, low percentages of support,
gradual elimination of noise, and eventual support for speed bumps.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon supported the overall project, particularly striping, medians at
entranceways, and speed cushions on Santiago Drive, Commodore Road, Dover Drive, and Highland
Drive, but cushions on Tradewinds Lane, Mariners Drive, and Polaris Drive can wait until outcomes
are known. He indicated no preference for either asphalt or rubber speed cushions.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, seconded by Council Member Duffield, to a) determine
this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections
15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical
change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) receive and file the Mariners and Dover Shores
Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study; c) waive the City Council Policy L-26 requirement for seventy
(70) percent community support, and direct staff to implement and install the improvements
outlined in the Mariners and Dover Shores Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study, as amended by
the City Council; and d) direct staff to advertise the project, and appropriate the necessary funds at
the time of contract award.
Council Member O'Neill stated neighbors were clearly frustrated with those who refuse to sign the
petition, Council wishes people would follow the law, Council has to be careful with its language in
order not to offer false hope, the goal is to avoid rhetoric, the data warrants some action, and he
would waive City Council Policy L-26 and support traffic calming measures, except speed cushions.
Volume 64 - Page 604
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Council Member Blom agreed with waiving City Council Policy L-26, clarified that speed cushions
have permanent and temporary options, approving speed cushions sends a message that Council
cares about residents' concerns, speed cushions should be placed at the entrance at Mariners Drive,
and rubber speed cushions provide more flexibility. .
Council Member Dixon supported the motion. In response to her question, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon
clarified that the motion exempts Tradewinds Lane, Mariners Drive, and Polaris Drive because they
do not meet the threshold for support. Council Member Dixon expressed support for including
Tradewinds Lane. Traffic Engineer Brine noted that speed cushions are not proposed for
Tradewinds Lane, only edgeline striping.
In response to Council Member questions, Traffic Engineer Brine indicated speed cushions on Tustin
Avenue are not showing signs of wear after 7 years, the rubber cushions can be removed and stored,
placing speed bumps on Santiago Drive but not Highland Drive will cause traffic to shift to Highland
Drive, speed bumps should be placed on parallel streets to prevent a shift in traffic, recommended
the proposed plan because it targets the key streets in the neighborhood and addresses parallel
streets, and stated that staff will conduct before and after studies to determine the impacts of the
traffic calming measures.
Council Member Blom requested an amendment to place a speed cushion at Mariners Drive because
it is the corridor into Dover Shores.
Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon and Council Member Duffield accepted the amendment to add
Mariners Drive.
Council Member Duffield advised that his community has huge speed bumps but no complaints from
residents due to them being a safety measure.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon indicated the only change
to the study is the omission of speed cushions from Polaris Drive.
Council Member O'Neill questioned the need for City Council Policy L-26, stated that Council is
trying to reduce speeding and driving under the influence, but believed Council is not following its
own policy, and disagreed with the present process.
Council Member Dixon believed COVID-19 has been a constraint to obtaining 70% support, the
policy is clear and has been followed, the key deciding factor is the speed study, City Council Policy
L-26 has never been modified, and Council may need to look at it. She proposed an amendment to
look at this policy.
Council Member O'Neill inquired regarding the standards for removal of speed cushions, clarified
that City Council Policy L-26 has been modified a few times, but the support percentage has not
been modified, and believed that none of the recommended traffic calming measures could have
prevented one of the fatalities or stop someone from drinking and driving.
Traffic Engineer Brine explained the reasons for developing City Council Policy L-26 in 2006 and
stated that, if Council wishes, staff can review provisions within City Council Policy L-26.
With Council Member O'Neill voting "no," the motion carried 6-1.
15. Resolution No. 2021-5: City Council Policy G -Series (City Trees) Revisions [100-2021]
Deputy Public Works Director Martin reported that, in 2019, the Parks, Beaches and Recreation
(PB&R) Commission formed an ad hoc committee to address specific issues in City Council
Policy G.
Volume 64 - Page 605
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Council Member O'Neill noted a typographical error on page 15-65, acknowledged a section on page
15-67, highlighted the language that states a homeowners association is not limited by geography
while private property owners are, and clarified that the 500 -foot radius should apply to
homeowners association and private property owners.
Council Member Dixon requested language regarding Level III testing for Special Trees be changed
from "may" to "shall." In response to her questions, Trees Superintendent Pekar advised that 1,300
Special Trees are located in the City, and approximately 18 Special Trees were removed in 2020.
He utilized a presentation to discuss Level III testing considerations, due process for tree removal,
timing, repeated testing, cost, 2020 Level III assessments, gray areas in testing, the results of
testing Marine Avenue trees, and the timeframe for receiving test results. Deputy Public Works
Director Martin added that the PB&R Commission's purview includes oversight of all Special Trees,
the PB&R Commission will ensure the testing process is followed, and requiring testing of all Special
Trees will be more hindrance than help. He stated that the PB&R Commission approved the
removal of the Marine Avenue trees and because of the process, Level III testing was recommended.
Council Member Brenner indicated a fungus is destroying the Marguerite Date Palms and believed
testing them would be a waste of money, which is why she is uncomfortable with "shall."
Council Member Blom noted the original debate is being repeated, a solution has been presented
that keeps the policy in place with a few modifications, believed that developers should pay for the
cost of testing if they propose a tree removal, and staff seems to oppose a language change that may
satisfy more community members.
In response to Mayor Avery's questions, Trees Superintendent Pekar related that the City's urban
forest is gaining with more than 35,000 trees, the Marine Avenue trees are extra special, but the
policy will apply to all trees. Mayor Avery believed trees are underrated in most communities and
flying in an expert from Canada speaks to the community's value of trees.
Council Member Brenner emphasized that the Ensign Intermediate School trees were on School
District property, Council Members did everything they could to save the trees, the issue was
emotional because the community loves its trees, and Council had no part in the decision.
Council Member O'Neill suggested designating the Marine Avenue trees as Landmark Trees and
requiring testing of Landmark Trees will probably take care of the concerns. Trees Superintendent
Pekar indicated the use of "shall" will still leave confusion for staff to sort out. Council Member
O'Neill suspected a requirement for testing a particular kind of tree would lead staff to consider that
designation extra special and to pay more attention to trees with that designation.
In response to Council Member Brenner's question, Council Member O'Neill read the list of
Landmark Trees. Council Member Brenner noted the Marine Avenue trees are distinctive and could
be in a class by themselves.
Council Member Dixon agreed with the proposal to create a new classification and expressed
confidence in staff making that judgment. Deputy Public Works Director Martin indicated Marine
Avenue trees can be designated Landmark Trees, staff will ensure Level III testing applies to
Landmark Trees, and the PB&R Commission process will remain.
City Attorney Harp proposed staff return to Council with the final language, which will include
mandatory Level III testing for Landmark Trees, designation of Marine Avenue trees as Landmark
Trees, and proposed changes in the presentation.
Mayor Avery remarked that the definition of a Landmark Tree should include where it is situated.
Council Member Dixon recalled the proposal to apply the 500 -foot radius to homeowner associations
and private property owners.
Volume 64 - Page 606
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
January 12, 2021
Motion by Council Member Dixon, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to continue the
item to a future City Council meeting.
Jim Mosher agreed that some of the Special Trees are more special than others, noted the definition
of Landmark Trees, and believed the language for dedicated trees does not align with the policy
language for donated/dedicated trees and benches.
Jim Maloney indicated that Council's solution is perfect, 12 Special Trees were examined for
removal in 2020 when only one or two are examined in a normal year, and believed staff can go
around the testing requirement by explaining their reasons to the PB&R Commission.
Dr. Linden Taylor urged Council to secure testing and to obtain the broadest amount of community
input before deciding on Special Tree removal, and recommended inclusion of "shall."
Charles Klobe supported the motion, agreed with Mr. Tanner's written comments, and hoped
Council considered those comments.
Dennis Bress thanked Council for the solution and their input.
David Tanner believed the proposed solution is a step in the right direction and suggested
mandatory testing for Special Trees due to community support and the possibility that it may
prevent future repetition of this issue.
Randy Black suggested that Council look at their districts for additional Neighborhood Trees that
should be designated Landmark Trees, Level III testing should address the specific concerns about
the tree, and the recent testing of the Marine Avenue trees cost approximately $1,100 per tree.
The motion carried unanimously.
16. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update [100-20211
Fire Chief Boyles utilized a presentation to discuss vaccine distribution, sites, number of vaccinations
administered, assistance from seasonal Lifeguards, next steps, Points of Distribution (POD),
registration for members of the public aged 75 years and over on the app othena.com, cases and
hospitalizations, and emergency transports.
In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, Fire Chief Boyles advised that members of the public
who are currently eligible may be able to receive a vaccination in the early afternoon without an
appointment if there are availabilities, and the County Medical Director authorized the City to
distribute the vaccine.
XX. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION — None
XXI. ADJOURNMENT — 10:42 p.m. in memory of former Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens
and Lydia Sharp
The agenda was posted on the City's website and on the City Hall electronic bulletin board
located in the entrance of the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive on
January 7, 2021, at 4:00 p.m.
Volume 64 - Page 607