HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Minutes - AmendedCity of Newport Beach
Planning Session (Special Meeting)
January 30, 2021
February 23, 2021
Agenda Item No. 1
Public Works Director Webb utilized a presentation and discussed the Facilities Finance Plan (FFP)
proposed adjustments for FY 2021-22, noted the FFP was approved by the Finance Committee, pointed
out changes and add-ons, and reviewed the two projects staff is proposing to add to the FFP: Newport
Coast Pickleball Courts and the replacement of the 15th Street Beach Restrooms.
In response to Council Member Brenner's question, Public Works Director Webb indicated that staff has
not found any State funding to assist with public restroom replacement, but staff can look into using
tidelands funds or parking revenue.
Public Works Director Webb, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer Houlihan, and Deputy Public
Works Director Martin continued with the presentation by reviewing the three major projects in
development that will require significant funding: Lower Harbor Navigation Channel Dredging, Balboa
Island Drainage System Improvements, and the Corporate Yard — City Fleet Fueling System.
In response to Council questions, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer Houlihan indicated staff
will look into State and Federal grant opportunities for the Balboa Island Drainage System
Improvements, but noted there is a lot of competition for grant funds. He also confirmed that the City
coordinates street repaving with undergrounding projects.
In response to Council questions regarding the City Fleet Fueling System, Public Works Director Webb
and Deputy Public Works Director Martin discussed#pmpressed Natural Gas (CNG), indicated the
Corporation Yard is the only CNG station in the City, noted that hydrogen fuel is still new technology
and he is unaware of any municipalities using it at this time, discussed public accessibility to the City's
CNG station and CNG station locations outside the City, and noted that Clean Energy controls the cost
of CNG since they operate the station.
Deputy Public Works Directors Martin and oulihan continued the presentation by reviewing fueling
challenges, highlighted Executive Order NA79-20 which sets goals for zero emissions vehicles, displayed
preliminary fuel island options, and discu sed funding allocations and schedule.
Public Works Director Webb displslide listing unfunded capital project requests and reviewed
the projects.
Council Member O'Neill noted thafThe Balboa Island Drainage System Improvements Project and the
Corporate Yard — City Fleet Fueling System Project will be almost $10 million in FY 2022-2023, so any
project that is deferred this year will be on the same list as those two projects and any deferred project
will be even more expensive. He emphasized that tough choices will need to be made not just in this
cycle, but for many years.
In response to Council Member Brenner's questions, Public Works Director Webb discussed trade-offs
to updating the video cameras, believed City trucks will be CNG for now since technology does not
currently exist to have electric trucks of that size, noted the City may be able to use AQMD funds to pay
for part of the project, and expressed hope that funding will be provided to assist with the Executive
Order.
Jim Mosher indicated that the Newport Ridge Park is a private park because the Irvine Company
wanted to dedicate it to the City for public use, but a former City Council rejected the offer of dedication.
He also noted that Council, last year, appointed ad hoc committees to deal with the Central Library
Lecture Hall and Junior Lifeguard Building, the terms of both ad hoc committees' ended at the end of
2020, and asked if Council received a report from the ad hoc committees.
Hoiyin Ip provided examples of hydrogen fuel technology, stated that the CR&R representative at the
last meeting indicated their Perris facility produces Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) that can be used in
CNG trucks, and discussed the benefits of RNG; however, she indicated that studies show that RNG
should be used onsite rather than transfer it through a pipeline. She noted that, pursuant to S131383,
cities are required to buy recycled organic waste products and asked if the City should buy it.
Volume 64 - Page 628
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
February 9, 2021
Council Member Blom concurred with moving forward with some ideas that do not need to go to
the Coastal Commission, if possible, and hoped to mend fences with those who want to invest in
the City.
Mayor Avery concurred with proceeding quickly, stated that the City needs to create housing
and receive the community's buy -in, indicated that the City needs well-built projects and
oversghh#e in order to create communities that reflect Newport Beach, added that the important
thing is to keep the integrity of current neighborhoods and villages, and believed ADUs will
impact parking.
Council Member Dixon indicated the Irvine Company's vision created the City that residents
enjoy today and it would be a big miss not to have their input, encouraged staff to start
conversations with them, and noted that legislation has changed planning laws and taken away
local control in the last two years.
Jim Mosher criticized the City's online efforts for public engagement, expressed confusion as to
what will be delivered on October 15, discussed staffs interpretation of changing just the
Housing Element without triggering Greenlight, but pointed out that converting hotel rooms to
housing will trigger Greenlight, and noted that staff has not discussed penalties if the City over
promises how much development will occur. ��
Nancy Scarbrough believed that what the State is askin� for is unreasonable, the RHNA
numbers are available in the Frimley -Horn report distributed to the HEUAC in December and
provided the numbers, using ADUs for a large portion f the RHNA numbers can give the City
time to work out the percentages of ADUs versus high-Rensity development versus reallocation,
the City needs a bigger plan to look at this, estimating a higher number of ADUs and monitoring
them will give the City time to plan for high-density housing, the percentages of 5% low-income
to 95% above -moderate or moderate income are not attainable, and the fact that West Newport
is the only industrial area needs IT be considered when discussing converting it to housing and
commercial.
David Tanner believed it A he City not to be in compliance with HCD requirements
because the City will not be alone, the State having an enforcement person is inevitable, stated
he wanted to hear more about the general welfare of residents and how changes will improve
quality of life, suggested that Council look at proactive measures to protect quality of life, related
that the talk about circumventing Greenlight is disheartening, talk about piecemealing the
General Plan is uelievable, and urged Council to reconsider the proposed course of action and
to look to the peoJ of Newport Beach first.
Council Member O'Neill related that no one said anything about circumventing Greenlight, a
General Plan Amendment is not piecemeahng, Council is talking about low -hanging fruit, there
will be many opportunities for public comment and discussion on this, there is a lot of work
being done here, and some of the dual -tracking is more appropriate for General Plan Updates
and some for a Council Policy. He proposed staff return with a Council Policy regarding 1) a
preference for ADU production, direction to staff to interpret codes consistent with that
preference, and direction to staff and the Planning Commission to bring further policy for code
changes to be consistent with that as HCD provides further guidance; 2) a direction to the
Planning Commission to review annually mixed-use zones for properties that have single,
nonresidential uses and to provide policy ideas that incentivize residential in mixed-use areas;
and 3) a preference for interpretation of codes that allow 1:1 hotel/motel conversion but no more
than 30% of the actual hotel/motel and that such interpretation carry with it some type of
development agreement, in -lieu fee, or both.
The City Council unanimously concurred to bring this policy back at a future meeting.
Volume 64 - Page 633