HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - 08-09-99August 23, 1999
Agenda Item # 1
* CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Study Session
August 9, 1999 - 4:00 p.m. A�1 r
INDEX
ROLL CALL
Present: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Ridgeway, Debay, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Absent: None
CURRENT BUSINESS
1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
Council Member Debay asked when the results of the DNA Study of
Contaminants to Newport Bay (Item #3) would be provided. Assistant to the
City Manager Kiff stated that it would depend upon how quickly the State
sets the scope of the study and when the contract is received. He added that
results could be provided as quickly as three to four months but more likely,
it would be next Spring. City Manager Bludau stated that, in Coronado,
once the samples were sent to Washington, it took forty days to receive the
results.
Council Member Ridgeway stated that he would[ be pulling both Items #3
and #12 (City's Response to Orange County Grand Jury's Report Entitled
Coastal Water Quality and Urban Runoff in Orange County) at the evening
City Council meeting to allow the opportunity for the public to hear a verbal
report on the items.
Council Member Debay requested that the City Attorney provide
background information on the intent of Item #4 (Ordinance Pertaining to
Obstructions on Public Property). City Attorney Burnham stated that the
ordinance provides the Police Department with a vehicle to prevent the
erection of permanent structures. He described a dispute that the Police
Department was recently involved in where they discovered that they had no
code available to them to enforce a suspected violation. City Attorney
Burnham stated that the language of the ordinance could be clarified, but
confirmed for Council Member Debay that the Police Department would use
discretion. Assistant City Attorney Clauson added that there are already
code provisions that deal with different elements of structures on public
property. She noted Section 13.20.010 of the proposed ordinance that allows
obstructions "otherwise authorized or permitted—by the City Council, City
Manager, or this Code ".
Council Member Debay asked for clarification on what contributions the City
will make pertaining to the LIUNA Pension Fund (Item #9). Assistant City
Attorney Clauson confirmed that the LIUNA contract adds no additional
costs to the City and that although the City will actually make the payments
to LIUNA, it is in lieu of a pay raise for those employees.
Mayor Pro Tern Thomson asked if there was an opportunity for the City to
reassign the position in the Agreement for Professional Services (Item #10).
Volume 52 - Page 636
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
City Attorney Burnham stated that there was and that language could be
added to the agreement to make this clear. Mayor O'Neil suggested that the
City Attorney be prepared to come back to the evening meeting with a
proposed provision that will allow the City to use the position in another
capacity if desired, rather than just terminating.
Mayor Pro Tern Thomson asked about the disclosure required for the Sale of
City -Owned Property at 204 44th Street (Item #15). City Attorney Burnham
could not confirm if the City is liable for the capped oil well or if the entity
that created the oil well would have the responsibility. He could confirm
that it was the City that capped the oil well. Council Member Ridgeway
stated that the person on title for the property holds the responsibility,
unless there was an indemnity with the previous titleholder. Mayor O'Neil
asked if the liability could be transferred to the new owner. City Attorney
Burnham could not confirm if the City would retain liability after the statute
of limitations may have expired and stated that other statutes may also
apply. Mayor O'Neil suggested that the City should document the sale to
make sure the buyer assumes the liability and indemnifies the City, if
possible. City Attorney Burnham stated that an agreement could be drafted
that protects the City to the maximum extent possible. Council Member
Debay confirmed with Assistant to the City Manager Kiff that the
abandoned oil well is not directly under the house, but adjacent to it. She
further confirmed with Assistant City Attorney Clauson that the disclosure
of the oil well would be provided to the buyer and that the City could have
the buyer sign a release that they have received the information. Council
Member Ridgeway confirmed again that the City can reduce its liability for
what occurred in the past, but that it cannot eliminate all liability for
possible future leaks or occurrences.
Regarding Development Agreement No. 6, CIOSA (Item #17), Council
Member Glover informed staff that she would be asking for clarification on
the fencing and the bluff top trail at the evening meeting.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY PROGRAM.
Transportation and Development Services Manager Edmonston stated that
the staff report was compiled after staff looked at twenty -three intersections,
which were chosen based on specific requests or per staff recommendation.
He said that data was collected on each intersection to help make a
determination on where traffic signals should be installed. He said that staff
narrowed the selection to three intersections that could be built and funded
in the current and next fiscal years.
Mr. Edmonston stated that three options for completing the work have been
provided in the staff report. He summarized that Options One and Two
provide for two construction contracts, one in each of the two fiscal years.
He said that Option Three would allow for all of the work to be done in the
current fiscal year.
Mr. Edmonston concluded by mentioning that representatives from the Sea
View community were in attendance at the meeting to support the signal at
San Miguel & Port Sutton/Yacht Coquette.
Volume 52 - Page 637
INDEX
Traffic Signal
Priority Program
(85)
0
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
Council Member Glover confirmed with Mr. Edmonston that the three
signals being recommended did meet at least one of the nationally
recognized signal warrants. Mr. Edmonston added that they also met
certain point criteria in the technical rankings. He added that six of the
twenty -three intersections studied did not meet the warrant criteria. In
response to Council Member Glover's question about how the signals that
were studied were selected, Mr. Edmonston stated that an accident will often
cause a citizen to request that an intersection be studied or staff will study
one based on previous reports.
Council Member Debay thanked the people in attendance from Sea View for
working with the City on the issue and for their willingness to help fund the
new signal.
Council Member Ridgeway asked for information about the criteria used for
the warrants. Mr. Edmonston referred to the last page of the staff report,
Traffic Signal Priority Ranking System, and stated that the warrants
primarily deal with the volume of traffic on the main street and side street.
He said that there are a total of eleven warrants, and although an
intersection might not meet the criteria of one warrant, it could meet it for
others.
Mr. Edmonston confirmed for Council Member Ridgeway that only one
warrant needs to be met for it to be determined that an intersection should
be looked at more closely and in some cases, it may be recommended that a
four-way stop would work better. He explained an example of how the point
system would work for an intersection that satisfied Warrant 6, Accident
Experience.
Mayor Pro Tem Thomson confirmed with Mr. Edmonston that Option Three
is more efficient than Option One because only one construction contract
would be needed. With this made possible due to a borrowing of the gas tax
funds during the current year, Mayor Pro Tem Thomson asked when staff
would know the actual cost of completing all three signals. Public Works
Director Webb stated that in February, staff usually has a good idea of what
projects will be completed during the current fiscal year and whether they
will come in as budgeted.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Thomson to direct staff to proceed with
Option Three for the installation of three signals and the upgrade of two
signal locations with the funding shortfall to be completed by the processing
of a $90,000 budget amendment.
Bill Wenke, 2025 Yacht Defender, President of the Sea View Homeowners
Association, stated that the Sea View community has been concerned about
the San Miguel Qa Port Sutton/Yacht Coquette intersection for many years
and finally took official action last year. He thanked the City Council and
staff for their support.
Council Member Ridgeway asked why the design and construction of a
. traffic signal is expected to take eighteen to twenty months. Public Works
Director Webb explained that it will take three to five months to complete
the design. Then the bidding process will begun and the contract can be
Volume 52 - Page 638
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
awarded. He stated that delivery of the poles takes six months, and that the
actual installation work will take only two to three months.
Council Member Debay asked how it is determined if the signals are set on a
cycle or triggered by mechanisms under the street. Public Works Director
Webb stated that all the signals that the City installs are vehicle- actuated
signals. He added that the decision that the City has to make is if the
signals should be inter -tied with other signals.
Darrell Chappell, 2007 Yacht Vindex, thanked the City Council and staff for
their hard work.
Paula Bogenrief, 1908 Yacht Maria, stated that the elementary school that
the students from the Sea View community attend is on the other side of San
Miguel. She stated that the children population in the development has
increased. She stated that some of the parents have decided to send their
children to Lincoln instead, and it divides the neighborhood. She
encouraged the City Council to vote in favor of the proposed traffic signals.
Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation.
3. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRIORITIES. Planning Department
Priorities
City Manager Bludau stated that due to the number of projects and the (68)
heavy workload in the Planning Department, he wanted to confirm that the
department was prioritizing their efforts as desired by the City Council. He •
stated that this will provide the City Council with an opportunity to ask
questions about the time spent on various projects and give staff clear
direction on the City Council's priority planning issues.
Council Member Ridgeway stated that the focused general plan amendment
on land use and circulation elements in the airport and Fashion Island areas
should be looked at specifically and prioritized by the City Council, as
related to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the recent initiative that was
filed.
Planning Director Temple stated that preparing the report provided her with
a new understanding of the reasons for the heavy workload in her
department. Referring to the budget amendment earlier in the year to pay
overtime for zoning level plan check reviews, she stated that they thought
the need would be for a temporary period only but that they have since
discovered that the City is in a period of sustained residential development
activity.
Planning Director Temple stated that approximately 95% of the
department's staff time is spent on sustaining mandatory activities, which
does not leave many hours for discretionary issues or projects. She stated
that the need to use overtime hours is ongoing because of the deficit of
available hours needed for the current workload activity list. She stated that
the overtime hours, in most cases, are paid at 1 1/2 times the employee's
salary. She asked that the City Council look at the planning program
priorities and provide staff with direction.
Volume 52 - Page 639
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
Council Member Ridgeway asked where the department could most use an
additional staff member or if it was needed. Planning Director Temple
explained that the report was not prepared with that intention, but that it
would probably be in the assistant or associate planner level. Planning
Director Temple added that the overtime hours utilized per year equal
approximately one -half of a full -time position's hours.
Council Member Ridgeway referred to the prioritization of the Harbor
Element item as "medium" in the staff report. He requested that this item
be changed to a "high" priority item. He stated that a harbor element for
Newport Bay is critical to managing and understanding the asset.
Council Member Debay referred to the Affordable Housing Project in the
Projects Not Yet Allocated list and asked if the City isn't required to move
ahead more quickly with this effort. Assistant City Manager Wood explained
that staff has included the Housing Element as a mandatory activity and
could later change the Affordable Housing Project to a higher priority if a
developer comes to the City with a project.
Council Member Glover thanked City Manager Bludau for beginning the
discussion with a clarification as to why the report was before the City
Council. She said that she had been confused by statements at previous
meetings about the Planning Department being adequately staffed and even
able to handle planning issues associated with the El Toro airport if needed.
Council Member Glover stated that the Planning Department probably
reached its height in the 1970's and that the tone of the department, as it
remains today, was set by Jim Hewicker. She stated her concern about all
the new projects and recommendations, and that the City should remember
the leaner times and that they could return.
Council Member Glover referred to the outline prepared by the Planning
Commission General Plan Update Committee in the staff report. She asked
why the City would be looking at Newport Tomorrow, a process put together
in the 1960's. Planning Director Temple stated that Newport Tomorrow is a
detailed assessment of the vision for Newport Beach. She added that she
refers to it every year or so, and tries to use it to the greatest extent possible.
Council Member Glover stated that she feels that policy issues should be
addressed by the City Council at the time the General Plan Amendment is
done, which she understands to be a couple years away. Planning Director
Temple confirmed that the City Council did decide not to pursue a
Comprehensive General Plan Update for two years, but the Planning
Commission is recommending that certain issues be focused on prior to that
update. Council Member Glover stated her concern that not everything can
be done now, and she feels that Newport Tomorrow would be better done in
conjunction with the General Plan Update.
Council Member Glover also asked when it was decided to do the Economic
Development element, as listed in the outline. Planning Director Temple
stated that it has only been suggested as a consideration, and the final
. decision would be made by the City Council.
Council Member Glover asked for staffs position on the Local Coastal Plan
Volume 62 - Page 640
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
(LCP), listed in the outline under Land Use and Circulation Elements.
Planning Director Temple stated that staff would not want to bring the
certification process to the City Council, unless circumstances changed with
the Coastal Commission. Assistant City Manager Wood added that another
issue, in addition to the certification of the LCP, is the review of the planning
for the coastal zone and that staff would recommend that this be done. She
stated that this would be a review and update of the land use plan portion of
the LCP.
Council Member Glover asked what staff would recommend as the priorities.
Planning Director Temple stated that the report was put together with the
desire to receive input from the City Council, and that staff may not be able
to accomplish all of the priorities in the current fiscal year. Council Member
Glover stated that her priorities would be the airport and annexation, while
taking care of the daily business. She asked what the involvement of the
Planning Department would be if annexations were accomplished. Planning
Director Temple confirmed that planning consultants would possibly be
used, depending upon the timeframe of the requests. She added that an
annexation would also increase the daily routine work in the Planning
Department.
Council Member Glover asked how the processing of the development
documents would occur. Planning Director Temple stated that, in the case of
Newport Coast, the planning documents used by the County are similar to
the City of Newport Beach's and shouldn't cause a great burden to City staff.
She added that the Banning Ranch and Santa Ana Heights areas may
require additional work for document checking.
Council Member Noyes agreed with Council Member Glover that the City
Council should be realistic, and that he'd like to be more specific with the
number of hours spent on each of the activities. He referred to the 600 hours
allocated to BID Administration and 100 hours to Balboa Peninsula Sign
Regulations. He stated that he thought the BID Administration was going to
be outsourced but regardless, the priorities should be for those programs
that benefit the citizens. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that only 100
hours is allocated to the review of the sign regulations because a consultant
is actually drafting the document. She added that the BID Administration
estimate takes into consideration the use of a consultant, but that the hours
of the consultant also benefit the Administrative Services Department.
Council Member Noyes stated that he still sees hours that seem unrealistic,
referring to CDBG Administration, Economic Development Strategic Plan
and Image Enhancement as being too high, and Code Enforcement as being
too low. He suggested that the Economic Development Committee could
possibly work on the Strategic Plan and the Planning Department could
concentrate on code enforcement more.
Council Member Noyes added that he'd like to look at the sign ordinance for
the entire City, rather than just the Peninsula. Assistant City Manager
Wood stated that the study of the Peninsula is already pretty far along, and
that adding the entire City would slow things down by several months.
Council Member Noyes stated that, even with the delay, looking at the entire
City at once might still be the way to go. Planning Director Temple added
Volume 52 - Page 641
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
that comprehensive sign code updates can be very controversial and her goal
by handling the Peninsula first is to make it a model for the rest of the City.
Council Member Ridgeway stated that maybe the older parts of the City,
such as Corona del Mar and Balboa Island, could be incorporated into the
Peninsula study. He stated that the newer planned communities often have
their own sign regulations.
Council Member Glover stated that if different parts of the town are truly
unique, maybe a different sign program for each would be more appropriate.
Council Member Noyes clarified that he was not suggesting that the entire
City have the same sign ordinance, but that it might be beneficial to look at
the entire City at the same time and possibly develop some general
regulations that would apply City -wide.
Council Member Debay asked if the number of code enforcement officers is
sufficient. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that currently there are
three code enforcement officers, two in Planning and one in Building, and
that other employees also perform code enforcement duties. Planning
Director Temple stated that staff is preparing a report on the assessment of
the administrative citations ordinance and long -term revenue stream
predictions. She stated that the report may point to available funding for a
part -time code enforcement officer. City Manager Bludau stated that the
City is currently only responsive to complaints and issues, and it would be a
policy decision to become more pro - active.
Assistant City Manager Wood clarified for Council Member Debay that the
report of Residential Building Records (RBR) is still mandatory, but the
seller can decline the inspection by informing the prospective buyer of this
and providing proof to the City that he has done so. She added that
although there may have been an isolated complaint from an individual, the
Board of Realtors is very happy with the City's program.
Mayor Pro Tern Thomson confirmed with Assistant City Manager Wood that
the seller can decline the primary inspection as well as any secondary
inspection, with the buyer's consent.
Mayor Pro Tem Thomson stated that he feels that the code enforcement
efforts should be increased, and he cited not parking cars in garages and
illegal real estate signs as examples.
Council Member Glover stated that the philosophy of the City has been that
codes are not enforced unless a complaint is submitted. She stated that if
the City Council wants to change this, they need to let the City Manager
know. She requested that the City Manager prepare a set of priorities from
the information received from the City Council at the current meeting, and
present it at the goal setting session in September.
Motion by Council Member .lover to agendize the item for further
direction at the City Council's September 18, 1999, goal setting conference.
In response to Council Member Noyes' concern about delaying direction to
Volume 62 - Page 642
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
staff, City Manager Bludau stated that the Planning Department can
proceed as they have been until that time. He added that the hours spent on
each activity and project, as presented in the report, are the best guesses of
the department. He stated that the department is looking to the City
Council for direction on whether the hours spent on each activity are
consistent with the priorities of the City Council.
Council Member Noyes stated that the code enforcement that is being done
is being done well, but sometimes the code enforcement officers are difficult
to reach.
Mayor O'Neil summarized some of the previous comments, and agreed that
there are a lot of activities and projects that are worthy of consideration but
the City Council needs to decide which can be done and how much time
should be spent on each.
Council Member Noyes suggested that less time should be spent on BID and
CDBG Administration and more time on Code Enforcement, and less time on
the Economic Development Strategic Plan and Image Enhancement and
more time on Sign Regulations.
Mayor O'Neil agreed that the issue of prioritizing the Planning Department's
activities is a large one and may not be possible at just the current meeting.
He said he supported the motion made by Council Member Glover.
Council Member Debay suggested that if the issue will be discussed at the
goal setting conference, that the Planning Commissioners should be invited
to attend that meeting.
Planning Commission Chairman Ed Selich stated that the goal of the
Planning Commission subcommittee in preparing the outline on the General
Plan Update was to provide the City Council with a roadmap of how to
accomplish a general plan update and what elements should be included. He
stated that Newport Center was the subcommittee's top priority, followed by
the airport area. He stated that they wanted to have the results of a total
comprehensive general plan without doing a complete overhaul and
amendment to the entire general plan. He said that the subcommittee felt
that most areas in the City do not need a change in their general plan
elements.
Mayor O'Neil agreed and stated that the City Council had already provided
this direction to the Planning Commission. He added that setting the
priorities of the Planning Department's activities is a huge task and not one
that is easy to accomplish.
Council Member Debay stated that she did not realize, and does not know
that she agrees, with doing a telephone survey to find out what the
community wants done with Newport Center. Chairman Selich stated that
it was decided that a telephone survey would be an efficient way to receive
scientific, helpful input and initial reactions from the public about the future
of Newport Center. Council Member Debay disagreed that a poll of public
opinion is scientifically accurate. Chairman Selich stated that the general
direction is to get people's feelings about Newport Center and how they see it
Volume 52 - Page 643
0
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
functioning. Council Member Debay suggested that the City Council meet
with the Planning Commission or the subcommittee, and stated her concern
that public input of that nature could be detrimental to the process and
possibly to the existing property owners.
City Manager Bludau stated that his intent in presenting the report on the
Planning Department priorities was to provide a snapshot of where the
department is spending its time currently and receive input on how it should
utilize its resources to accomplish the priorities of the City Council.
Mayor O'Neil understood that the exercise of looking at the broad picture of
the projects and priorities is useful, but he would prefer a recommendation
from staff on how to run the department.
Council Member Glover stated her agreement with Council Member Debay's
comment that the City Council needs to work more closely with the Planning
Commission, with the telephone survey providing an example of something
the City Council was not aware of and may not agree with.
Mayor O'Neil stated the City Council's appreciation of the Planning
Commission's efforts. Council Member Noyes stated his support of the
Commission also.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
4. MOORING RATES WITHIN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH.
Deputy Fire & Marine Chief Melum stated that representatives of the
Newport Mooring Association were present at the meeting.
Deputy Chief Melum stated that the staff report deals with the 750 offshore
moorings in the harbor, which float over the State tidelands for which the
City is the trustee. This requires the City to establish leases and permit
rates which are reasonably consistent with those charged for similar
locations, values and uses.
Deputy Chief Melum stated that in 1974, through an audit conducted by the
State, it was advised that the City adjust its rates from $1.20 per foot per
year to $6.00 per foot per year. In 1976, the City made the recommended
adjustment and over the years, has adjusted the rate based on the Consumer
Price Index (CPI). He stated that today, the rate is $20.00 per foot per year,
with the last adjustment made in 1994. He stated that since the last
adjustment, the CPI has increased 9.30A.
Deputy Chief Melum stated that another consideration that needs to be
made is whether the City is charging an appropriate amount based on what
other harbors in the state are charging for offshore moorings. He referred to
Exhibit A in the staff report, Annual Mooring and Slip Rate Comparisons by
Volume 52 - Page 644
INDEX
Mooring Rates
(61)
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
IO1]o1:1
Region, and stated that the rates of moorings and slips as well as the ratio
between the two should be looked at. The graph pointed out that the City of
Newport Beach is among the highest in the State for both.
Deputy Chief Melum stated that another issue to consider when deciding
whether to adjust rates is to look at the type of amenities that are provided.
He referred to Exhibit B which listed the same harbors and showed that the
City of Newport Beach offers very few amenities, in comparison to the
others.
Deputy Chief Melum referred to Exhibit C, Tideland User Fee Comparison,
and stated that it illustrates that there is a major difference in what the
tideland users pay but that there is also a major difference in the capital
outlay and costs.
In conclusion, Deputy Chief Melum stated that the City has typically
adjusted the mooring rate based on the CPI, but that Newport is higher than
adjacent harbors. He stated that amenities provided should be addressed
and is already being looked at by the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee. Lastly, he
stated that the slip fees were recently adjusted and are at market, but that
the mooring rates are below market. He added that staff is preparing a
report on the commercial fees, and will also ask that the City Council look at
the residential fees in the future.
Council Member Noyes asked about the other maintenance costs associated
with the moorings. Deputy Chief Melum stated that moorings are required
to be inspected and repaired every two years, which usually costs $300 to
$400 and is paid for by the mooring permittee.
Council Member Noyes stated that Exhibit B clearly illustrates that the City
of Newport Beach provides little in the way of amenities. He asked for
further information on what the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee has considered.
Deputy Chief Melum stated that dinghy storage would be a great benefit to
the mooring owners, and that there might be a possible opportunity with the
Marina Village or American Legion sites, as well as appropriate public beach
locations. He added that public parking has been another consideration of
the Committee and might be made more efficient for the mooring owners
through some type of parking pass. In response to Council Member Noyes'
suggestion, Deputy Chief Melum stated that the parking lot at the Yacht
Basin is now full most every weekend. Council Member Noyes suggested
that those parking spots might be better utilized for dinghy storage, and
confirmed with Deputy Chief Melum that no fee is currently charged for
parking in the lot and that mainly tenants of the Yacht Basin use it.
Deputy Chief Melum clarified for Council Member Ridgeway that of the 1200
moorings in the harbor, approximately 450 are onshore moorings and the
remaining 750 are offshore moorings. He added that each offshore mooring
is designated with a specific maximum length and that length is what the
rate is based on. The length is determined by the size of the mooring area
and the weight that is used. He stated that the City used to bill by boat
length. He added that under the current billing method, the approximate
average length billed is 35 to 45 feet.
Volume 52 - Page 645
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
Mayor Pro Tem Thomson asked about the vacancy factor. Deputy Chief
Melum stated that all of the 750 offshore moorings are full, with a waiting
Est of 20 to 30 years. He stated that the Harbor Patrol fills temporarily
vacant moorings with transient boats at a per night charge.
Council Member Adams stated his awareness of the waiting list and
suggested that the City might want to charge full market rate for those
owners that come off of the waiting list. Deputy Chief Melum stated that
only one or two owners come off of the waiting list per year due to the fact
that the moorings can be transferred with the sale of a boat. He added that
some regions have a transfer fee, and that the City of Newport Beach has
considered this.
For Council Member Noyes, Deputy Chief Melum stated that the total
revenue is almost $700,000 per year, with offshore moorings accounting for
approximately $540,000 of that total.
Clive Towndrow, 1463 Villa Cardiff Drive, Cardiff, President of the Newport
Mooring Association, stated that the Newport Mooring Association (NMA)
was formed when the City changed its accounting method for billing mooring
permittees from boat length to mooring length. He stated that the NMA
Board studied the issue of tidelands administration, prepared a full report
and found that the City of Newport Beach is charging more than other
moorings in the harbor as well as up and down the coast. Further, he stated
that they were paying more than what the CPI increases would have totaled
. had the method not changed. He added that the staff report is trying to
compare Newport's rates to others when Newport charges per mooring foot
not boat foot and when Newport doesn't offer the amenities of the other
regions. Mr. Towndrow stated that in addition to studying mooring rates,
the NMA has also been active in working with the City on such things as the
derelict boat ordinance, participating on the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee and
providing input on water quality issues. In conclusion, he requested that the
mooring fees be reduced.
Council Member Ridgeway informed Mr. Towndrow that the City Council is
probably not in possession of the report prepared by the NMA and that it
was not included in the staff report.
Council Member Adams stated that it would be difficult to decrease the
mooring rates when they are 100% occupied. He did agree that the
amenities offered by the City should be enhanced, particularly in the area of
dinghy storage, and he was anxious to hear what the Ad Hoc Harbor
Committee would be suggesting. Lastly, Council Member Adams stated that
he'd like the City to change the way it transfers moorings to those on the
waiting list.
Council Member Noyes suggested that the City Council might want to
consider leaving the rates as they are, but setting aside a portion of the
current fee to apply to amenity enhancement in the future.
. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the City is currently at about a 50%
deficit on all tidelands administration and probably shouldn't be setting
aside money for amenity enhancements. He stated that dinghy storage is
Volume 52 - Page 646
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
difficult because the City does not own any upland parcels.
Council Member Debay confirmed with Deputy Chief Melum that the
County charges differently than the City. She further confirmed that a
comprehensive study of the tidelands is only in its beginning phases, and
expressed her opinion that it might be better to make any adjustments to the
fees once the study is completed.
Council Member Debay stated that in Tahoe a service is provided to drive
people to their boats. Deputy Chief Melum stated that this idea could be
looked at by the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee in conjunction with the water
taxi concept that is already being discussed.
Council Member Glover asked why transfers of moorings are even allowed,
and she asked the City Attorney if this was improper use of tidelands. City
Attorney Burnham stated that amendments were considered by the City at
one point to prohibit transfers, but the issue was protested by a great
number of mooring owners and not pursued further. City Attorney
Burnham stated that rules have been adopted related to seaworthiness of
vessels assigned to moorings.
Mayor O'Neil summed up the City Council's direction to staff by stating that
the rates should not be adjusted at this time, but that amenities should be
looked at and included in the comprehensive report that is being prepared.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Council Member Noyes read an excerpt from a letter from Supervisor Tom
Wilson to the Chairman of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. He
stated that with some minor editing, someone could have some fun with the
letter. He gave the letter to the City Attorney.
ADJOURNMENT — 6:00 p.m.
The agenda for the Study Session was posted on August 4, 1999, at 4:00 p.m.
on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport
Beach Administration Building.
Recording Secretary
Mayor
City Clerk
Volume 52 - Page 647
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes DRAFT
Regular Meeting
August 9, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX
— 6:00 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED — None.
RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING
ROLL CALL
Present: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Absent: None
Pledge of Allegiance — Council Member Noyes.
Invocation by Bishop Mike Browning, Newport Beach Stake - Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints.
Groundwater Replenishment System Presentation by William R. Mills,
General Manager, Orange County Water District.. Council Member Debay
is requested that a resolution supporting the groundwater replenishment system be
placed on the August 23 agenda.
MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A
FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON-
• Council Member Ridgeway requested that the Balboa Pier parking study and the
Parking Management Plan be agendized for a study session and subsequently
for a regular meeting.
• Council Member Ridgeway requested that charter boat regulations, parking,
mooring, and noise compliance be reviewed at a future study session.
• Council Member Noyes requested that a resolution be placed on the August 23
agenda regarding the Santa Ana River Watershed Authority.
• In response to a letter in the Daily Pilot, Council Member Noyes stated that the
Balboa Bay Club remodel will provide more public access to the Club.
CONSENT CALENDAR
READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
1. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING O]F JULY 26, 1999. Waive
reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed.
2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in
full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City
Volume 52 - Page 648
Groundwater
Replenishment
(69)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
to read by title
RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
3. Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway.
ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
4. ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 13.20 TO THE NBMC
PERTAINING TO OBSTRUCTIONS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Continue to August 23, 1999, to afford the City Attorney more time to
rewrite the ordinance.
5. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5.50 OF THE NBMC
PERTAINING TO MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS. Introduce
Ordinance No. 99 -21 and pass to second reading on August 23, 1999.
6. ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 1.55 TO THE NBMC PERTAINING
TO UPPER NEWPORT BAY RECREATION AND SCENIC TRAIL.
Introduce Ordinance No. 99 -22 and pass to second reading on August 23,
1999.
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
ALARM ORDINANCE CHANGES AND ASSOCIATED FEES. Adopt
Ordinance No. 99 -19 amending Chapter 5.48 (Telephonic Alarm System) and
Chapter 5.49 (Burglary- Robbery -Fire Alarm Systems) of the NBMC.
8. BALBOA BAY CLUB, 1221 WEST COAST HIGHWAY — AN
AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS OF
THE EXISTING PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
TO CORRECT AN ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL CALCULATION OF
THE BUILDING SIZE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PREVIOUS
APPROVAL, AS WELL AS TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN THE SIZE
OF THE HOTEL FACILITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE BUILDING
SUPPORT AREAS, ATHLETIC FACILITIES, AND MEETING SPACE.
ALSO INCLUDED IN THE AMENDMENT ARE PROVISIONS TO
ALLOW THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING TO BE MEASURED
FROM THE AVERAGE GRADE OF THE SITE, AND TO ALLOW THE
PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE ARCHITECTURAL
FEATURES WHICH EXCEED THE BASIC HEIGHT LIMIT. Adopt
Ordinance No. 99 -20 approving amendments to the Planned Community
District Regulations for the Balboa Bay Club.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
9. LIUNA PENSION FUND. Approve City Key and Management employees
participation in the LIUNA Pension Plan; authorize the Mayor to sign the
Amendment to the MOU with the City Employees Association (CEA); and
authorize the City Manager to sign the Standard Form Participation
Agreement and other documents required to implement the City's
participation in the LIUNA Pension Fund for CEA employees and Key and
Management personnel.
Volume 52 - Page 649
TI -iw.1
Public Property
Obstructions (70)
Ord 99 -21
Massage Establishments
(27)
Ord 99 -22
Upper Newport Bay
(51)
Ord 99 -19
Alarm Systems
(40/70)
Ord 99 -20
Use Permit 3524
Balboa Bay Club/
1221 W. Coast Hwy.
(38)
C -3288
C -2059
LIUNA Pension
Fund/CEA and
Key & Management
(38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999 INDEX
• 10. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. Authorize the City C -3300
Manager to sign Professional Consulting Agreement with Peggy Ducey to Peggy Ducey /OCRAA
serve as Executive Director of the Orange County Regional Airport E1 Toro Airport
Authority (OCRAA). (38/54)
MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR AUGUST 5, 1999. Receive Planning
and file. (68)
Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DAHLIA/FERNLEAF
SLOPE REPAIR (C- 3157). Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
Dahlia/Fernleaf Slope Repair.
Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway.
SALE OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY — 204 44TH STREET. Authorize
the sale of City -owned property at 204 44th Street for $430,000.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Thomson to approve the Consent Calendar,
except for those items removed (3, 12, and 14).
The mot
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
ion carried by the following roll call vote:
Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
None
None
None
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALE NDAR
S. DNA STUDY OF CONTAMINANTS TO NEWPORT BAY — APPROVAL
OF PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZATION TO
APPROVE CONTRACT.
12. CITY'S RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY'S REPORT
ENTITLED COASTAL WATER QUALITY AND URBAN RUNOFF IN
ORANGE COUNTY.
Regarding Item 3, Assistant to the City Manager Kiff reported that the City
will use $175,000 of State funds to conduct DNA fingerprinting of
contaminants in Newport Bay. He reported that there are occasional high
coliform readings, which designates the presence of pathogens, and that the
study will help determine what is causing the contaminants and assist in
determining how to deal with the problem. He reported that the Harbor
Quality Committee expressed their support of the study on Thursday.
In response to Council Member Glover's questions, Mr. Kiff confirmed that
the City is responsible for limiting coliform levels (TMDL limits) that come
down the storm drains and stated that the DNA study will help characterize
the coliform and meet the TMDLs.
Volume 52 - Page 650
C -3157
Slope Repair
(38)
204 44th Street
(73)
C- 3263/Res 99 -56
Newport Bay
DNA Study (38/51)
OC Grand Jury/
Water Quality &
Urban Runoff (51)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
Council Member Glover stated that she serves on the Executive Water
Committee and expressed concern about what the TMDL limits will mean to
the City. She believed that this could become a tremendous financial burden
for the City if it cannot meet the TMDL limits, and that all watershed
entities should be responsible. She believed that periodic testing should be
conducted to determine what is going into the Bay from upstream.
Noting that Council tried to pass an ordinance banning the feeding of birds,
Council Member Ridgeway stated that this test could also determine if birds
are the cause of the coliform levels.
Regarding Item 12, Assistant to the City Manager Kiff reported that the
Orange County Grand Jury studied the issue of urban runoff/discharge from
the storm drains and sent a report which requested a response from the City.
He agreed with the Grand Jury's analysis that there is a lack of public
education about what ends up in the oceans and bays. He indicated that the
City is trying to work with the upstream cities and reported that the City's
street sweeping program has helped in the clean -up effort. City Manager
Bludau added that the Orange County Grand Jury sent this report to other
cities for feedback.
Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to approve, in concept, proposed
Scope of Work for DNA Study, and adopt Resolution No. 99 -56 authorizing
the Mayor to approve a future contract with the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region) for a DNA study of contaminants
to Newport Bay based on the approved Scope of Work (Item 3); and
authorize the Mayor to sign a letter responding to the Orange County Grand
Jury's report (Item 12).
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
14. PUBLIC INPUT ON LONG RANGE PLANNING FOR NEWPORT
CENTER.
Council Member Ridgeway expressed the opinion that spending $20,000 for
a non - scientific study is an improper use of funds and an improper way to
plan. Further, the questions in the survey are very subjective and
misleading, and consequently may result in Fashion Island being expanded
through the conduct of a telephone interview.
Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to deny the contract for survey
work.
Council Member Adams stated that, if Council denies this, the Planning
Commission should know that Council understands their desire to get
community feedback but that they may want to do this in a different way.
He believed that the Planning Commission's efforts to work on a long term
Newport Center comprehensive plan is good and that they do need
community input.
Volume 52 - Page 651
INDEX
Newport Center
(68)
•
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
• Substitute motion by Council Member Noyes to bring this back in
30 days in order to give the Planning Commission the opportunity to adapt
to Council comments and concerns.
Assistant City Manager Wood expressed concern regarding the 30 day
continuance since they are trying to move this project along quickly, as
directed by Council.
Council Member Noves amended his substitute motion to bring this
back in two weeks in order to give the Planning Commission the opportunity
to adapt to Council comments and concerns.
Council Member Noyes stated that the Planning Commission has worked
hard on this and that he does not want them to lose their motivation on the
concept.
Council Member Glover stated that Council asked that Urban Design come
up with a design concept for Fashion Island. She indicated that involving
the community is a long term process and believed that true involvement
cannot be reached in a short period. She stated that she will not support
anything that is rushed. She expressed the opinion that this is
inappropriate and that the information would not serve a good purpose.
Council Member Debay stated that she will be supporting the substitute
motion even though she is not supportive of the telephone survey. She
. indicated that she is willing to look at this again in two weeks and added
that she does not want to discourage the overall concept -of doing a partial
general plan amendment for Newport Center.
The amended substitute motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Thomson, Debay, Noyes
Noes: Glover, Ridgeway, Mayor O'Neil
Abstain: None
Absent: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS
• Clive Towndrow, President of the Newport Mooring Association, stated that the
members of the Mooring Association are upset with the fees that are being
charged for offshore moorings.
Sara Jane Towndrow, Past President and now Treasurer of the Newport
Mooring Association, stated that she spent money to inform the members that
the mooring issue was going to be on the regular agenda, not the study session
agenda. Mayor O'Neil indicated that she can contact the City Manager to have
this issue placed on a future agenda. Ms. Towndrow stated that they are looking
for a fee structure that is not based on what the City charges for a boat slip.
• Bob Pone, 5314 West Henderson Place, reported that he initially paid $12/foot
for his mooring, but is now paying $20 /foot. He asked where the taxes are going
and if they benefit the mooring owners. He noted that there are no facilities for
the mooring owners and that a bathroom would be nice. He emphasized that he
Volume 52 - Page 652
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
is wanting fair rates, believing that there is a 90 percent difference between
what he is paying and what others are paying for docks and shore moorings.
Tim Lewis, 2075 Harbor, stated that he has been a mooring permittee for ten
years and that he recently returned from a boating trip to Sacramento where he
visited many harbors and marinas. He believed that his Newport Beach
mooring is the best value to store his vessel, even though he pays half the
amount at another location. He stated that the Newport Mooring Association
does not represent him and others he knows and that, even though they would
like to pay less, they realize they could be paying more. Mr. Lewis expressed the
opinion that the City has been fair and that the work in determining the rates
was well done and accurate. He requested that he also be invited to participate
in the study if the Newport Mooring Association is invited.
Don Holly, 14712 Buckingham Place, Tustin, stated that he spent most of his
youth working in the boating environment and has been a mooring permitee for
the past four years. He expressed the opinion that Newport Harbor is one of the
most unfriendly harbors in terms of amenities. He believed that the staff report
is false because Exhibit A makes a comparison between slip rates, which are
private property, and mooring rates, which are public property. He noted that
Exhibit B tries to compare the amenities in Newport Harbor and other harbors,
but noted that there are none. Mr. Holly expressed the opinion that staff should
do an analysis with the revenues that are generated from mooring fees and then
compare them with other ports.
Council Member Debay stated that Council realizes that the amenities are few,
but explained that there are no places for the City to put in dinghy storage since
it does not own the uplands. She reported that including a parking permit to go
with the mooring permit was discussed during the study session. She stated
that a study is being conducted and clarified that the slips that were included in
the staff report were public slips, not private slips. She believed that a mailing
should go out before this comes back to Council.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
16. 1999 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM.
Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing.
There being no public testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member Glover to adopt Resolution No. 99 -57
ordering the Fire and Marine Chief to abate weeds and other nuisances
identified to be existing upon streets, alleys, sidewalks, parkways, and
private property within the City; and schedule a public hearing on
October 25, 1999, to confirm assessments against those properties cleaned by
the City.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Volume 52 - Page 653
ZF113F.9
Res 99.57
Weed Abatement
(41)
I*
0
0
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
Absent: None
17. STATUS REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6 (THE
IRVINE COMPANY, CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN
SPACE AGREEMENT [ CIOSA] (contd. from 7/12/99).
Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing.
Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the CIOSA development
agreement was carried over because of some questions regarding the
landscaping and fence work at the Castaways. She indicated that staff has
worked with the project developer and that a number of things have been
done to correct some of the problems. She reported that there is compliance
with the development agreement.
Referencing page 3 of the staff report, Council Member Glover expressed the
opinion that the fence is inferior and asked if the City will accept such a
fence from Taylor Woodrow. Ms. Wood reported that none of the conditions
for approval specified the type of fence to use and that the City approved the
fence that was installed. Council Member Glover believed that the
assumption was that Taylor Woodrow would give an appropriate fence that
meets City standards and that they should respect the community enough to
provide decent fencing. City Attorney Burnham indicated that the City
cannot deny the development agreement based on the fence issue. However,
he noted that the City has not yet accepted the maintenance responsibility
for all improvements and landscaping and indicated that it is the City's
intent.to discuss the fence issue with Taylor Woodrow.
City Manager Bludau recommended that this item be tabled until the City
can have discussions with Taylor Woodrow.
In response to Council Member Glover's statement that she will not support
this until Taylor Woodrow provides decent fencing, Council Member
Ridgeway indicated that the City has not yet accepted this and that the City
has until 2001 before it accepts the improvements. He clarified that
tonight's action is to indicate that Taylor Woodrow is in compliance with the
landscaping.
A.J. Jarvis, Development Manager for Taylor Woodrow, 20466 Ridge Route
Drive, Laguna Hills, stated that they have commenced the remedial work
along the bluff top for the removal of saltbush, as recommended by their
environmental consultant, and that they will continue to do this over the
next three to four weeks. He indicated that Taylor Woodrow is in agreement
with staffs recommendations regarding the revegetation of the Castaways
bluff top. However, he took issue with the recommendation that Taylor
Woodrow maintain responsibility until the overgrowth of the saltbush is
under control and replanting has been successful, noting that it could take
about two years before the plants grow. Mr. Jarvis stated that Taylor
Woodrow requests that the maintenance responsibilities be immediately
transferred to the City following the trimming; of the saltbush and the
replanting of the new specie. He explained that Taylor Woodrow has met,
and sometimes exceeded, the revegetation planting; therefore, is in
compliance with the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and the EIR
mitigation measures. He noted that much of the trampling /damage that
Volume 52 - Page 654
INDEX
C -2920
Development
Agreement No. 6
CIOSA
(38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
occurred was a result of the City's request to have the chain link fence
removed. He indicated that he sent correspondence and a report from LSA
to Development Engineer Hoffstadt that stated that Taylor Woodrow was
strongly opposed to the removal of that fence.
Mr. Jarvis stated that Taylor Woodrow erected a fence that was designed to
be viewed through and was not intrusive. He stated that they spent $14,000
to $20,000 to replace the fence, but indicated that he will go back to Taylor
Woodrow to let them know what Council Member Glover's views are and
then meet with Public Works later in the week.
Council Member Glover stated that she has been receiving emails and calls
regarding the fence from people who purchased Taylor Woodrow homes and
expressed concern for those who are looking at these fences. She indicated
that she understands the problem with the trampling of the vegetation, but
stated that, until the area establishes itself, everyone is needing to replant.
Mr. Jarvis reported that the titles for those areas have been conveyed to the
City. Further, the City accepted the trail and that the fence probably falls
under the definition of the trail. He indicated that he is the President of the
Castaways Homeowners Association and that he has not received any calls.
Council Member Ridgeway referenced page 3 and stated that Taylor
Woodrow technically does not have to provide a new fence and reiterated
that Mr. Jarvis indicated that they will work to provide an adequate fence.
He pointed out that Taylor Woodrow has not provided fencing to the island
area and, therefore, are not in full compliance and the City cannot receive
the dedication. Council Member Ridgeway noted that the saltbush has not
been eradicated and that this also shows that they are working towards
compliance even though they are not currently in compliance.
There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member Rid¢ewav to continue this item for 30 days.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
18. BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO SIGN (MARK FRANK, CONTACT PERSON),
3007 EAST COAST HIGHWAY — REQUEST TO PERMIT THE
INSTALLATION OF A ROOF SIGN ON A NEW PARAPET WALL
WHERE THE CODE LIMITS ROOF SIGNS TO BUSINESS
LOCATIONS THAT PRECLUDE THE EFFECTIVE USE OF A POLE
SIGN, GROUND SIGN OR PROJECTING SIGN.
Planning Director Temple stated that, at the July 22 Planning Commission
meeting, the applicant offered a reduced sign size as one of the options. The
Planning Commission approved the proposed logotbroken ticket sign with a
size limitation of 4 -feet by 8 -feet.
Volume 52 - Page 655
`
Ii�I17a1:1
Modification 4879
Blockbuster Video
Sign
(94)
0
11
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
. In response to Council Member Debay's questions, Ms. Temple stated that
the zoning code does not have good definitions to determine if this was a wall
sign or a roof sign. However, upon reviewing the specifics of the parapet, it
became clear that this was part of the roof.
Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing.
Mark Frank, 19209 Foxglen Lane, Huntington Beach, San Pedro Sign
Company, stated that they are requesting a roof top sign to help create a
focal point to the entrance. He presented Council with a comparison of the
current channel lettering to the proposed torn ticket logo, believing that
people do not read signs but recognize logos. He reported that the logo
would have 9.5 -inch high lettering, as opposed to the current 19 -inch
lettering. He stated that they have a letter of support from the Corona del
Mar Chamber of Commerce and indicated that the sign could be turned off at
the close of business.
In response to Council Member Noyes' question, Mr. Frank confirmed that
he would be willing to include language that the sign be turned off at closing.
Val Skoro, 1601 Bayadere Terrace, expressed the opinion that the current
Blockbuster sign is a smart sign and that everyone knows what Blockbuster
is. He believed that there is a propensity to get bigger signs and reported
that signs were a concern at the Corona del Mar design charette. He stated
that the sign is not necessary and hoped that the request is denied. He
db distributed photos of the current Blockbuster sign, Rite Aid signs, signs on
Mariner's Mile, and Beach Boulevard signs.
There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing.
Motion by Council Member Noyes to sustain the action of the Planning
Commission and include language that the sign be turned off at closing time.
Council Member Ridgeway expressed the opinion that the type of business
Blockbuster produces is repeat business and does not necessarily need the
torn ticket logo. He stated that there are two Blockbusters in the City and
that the one at MacArthur and Bison, which does not have the torn ticket
logo, does very well.
The motion carr ied by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: None
Abstain: Ridgeway
Absent: None
19. JIFFY LUBE OF NEWPORT BEACH. (ARTHUR BAHAR,
ARCHITECT), 1520 WEST COAST HIGHWAY — REQUEST TO
PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN AUTOMOBILE
MAINTENANCE FACILITY WHICH SPECIALIZES IN OIL AND
FILTER CHANGES AND CHASSIS LUBRICATION ONLY AND A
REQUEST TO WAIVE SIXTEEN OF THE REQUIRED PARKING
SPACES.
Volume 52 - Page 656
INDEX
Use Permit 3647
Jiffy Lube/
1520 West Coast Hwy.
(88)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the Planning Commission
struggled over this for some time and that two Commissioners felt that the
use permit should not be approved because this would have detrimental
effects on surrounding properties. Additionally, they had concerns with the
visibility of the service bays from Coast Highway; the impact that this would
have for the properties on either side; the intensity of this project on this size
lot; and whether the circulation could be properly accommodated. She
reported that the applicant spent quite some time with staff and the
Mariner's Mile design consultant to continuously improve the architecture
and appearance of the building and redesign the site plan to eliminate one
driveway and use a shared driveway with Taco Bell. She indicated that the
applicant also agreed to different colors and materials for the building and to
extend the appearance around the building so that the service doors will
coordinate with the rest of the building when they are closed. She indicated
that, because the applicant was willing to do these things, the majority of the
Commissioners felt the conditions of approval would minimize any potential
for detrimental impact on surrounding property owners.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Thomson's questions, Associate Planner
Myers stated that there are no parking requirements for this type of use, but
that the closest use would be of a service station which is required to provide
five spaces per bay. He added that the requirement also takes the
mezzanine office into account and indicated that the applicant was unable to
provide the entire parking amount on site.
Mr. Myers reported that the building is set back about 12 -feet from the
property line to the street. He described the building, stating that it will use
travertine marble on the vertical elements, smooth stucco of similar color on
the balance of the building, and taupe colored concrete tile on the roof.
Regarding prohibiting left turns out of the driveway, Ms. Wood stated that
the Planning Commission discussed this, but felt that it was unenforceable.
She indicated that, after the applicant agreed to install the sign and
encourage customers to only make right turns, the condition to install the
sign with no requirement to angle the driveway to prevent left turns was
included (Condition No. 24). Council Member Adams believed that it is not
right to install a regulatory sign knowing that people are going to ignore it
and that doing this degrades the value of similar signs. Public Works
Director Webb agreed that a sign should not be installed if it is
unenforceable or is not intended to be enforced. Council Member Adams
believed that people should be able to make the left turn if it is not
problematic.
Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing.
Christian Fanticola, 45 Auvergne, Jiffy Lube, stated that he has worked
closely with Council Member Glover and staff to provide a good project and
noted that the design has gone through many revisions. He stated that the
Jiffy Lube is a use that can survive on 60 to 70 cars a day and creates less
traffic. He referred to his business as a "lubertorium" that does not require
many parking spaces since customers do not park their cars in a parking
stall. He stated that the only parking spaces that are needed are for
employees. Mr. Fanticola indicated that staff has visited other centers that
have less parking and that their parking is adequate. He explained that the
Volume 52 - Page 657
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
INDEX
differences between Jiffy Lubes and service stations are that service stations
are designed to make money from more expensive services, like brake jobs,
and are not designed for high volume. Mr. Fanticola expressed the opinion
that the building will be a beautiful building for the area and an excellent
improvement.
Council Member Debay commended Mr. Fanticola for getting this project
through and thanked Council Member Glover for all the work she has done
to create some type of design standard for Mariner's Mile. She expressed the
opinion that the design is high quality and that the landscaping will be
superior. She reiterated that this use is a low traffic generator, creates
almost no noise, and is an efficient business. Council Member Debay stated
that the code does not specify what an inappropriate use is and that the
narrow lots and harsh conditions have caused many businesses to fail.
Ayres Boyd, 2541 Crestview Drive, Vice President of the Board of Directors
of the Bayshores Community Association, stated that he is representing the
249 homeowners in that Association. He urged Council to vote against the
Jiffy Lube since it will offer minimal amount of new tax revenue; there are
plenty of places on 17th Street and in Costa Mesa to get oil changed; it is
inexcusable to place another utility business in front of the world famous
Balboa Bay Club; it does not improve the quality of life; and it limits future
development opportunities. Mr. Boyd stated that he spoke against the Taco
Bell project last year, but that was still approved and built across from the
Balboa Bay Club. He believed that the reason for the systematic "junking" of
. this part of Mariner's Mile is because the City does not have a conclusive
plan for that section. He asked if the City wants to attract quality
businesses and guests, or if it wants people thinking that they can leave
their used oil in the City. He requested that the City keep utility businesses
separate from residential and recreational areas.
In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions, Mr. Boyd indicated
that neither the Association nor the Board voted on this. Council Member
Ridgeway took issue, stating that Mr. Boyd indicated that he represented
the homeowners when that was untrue.
Ira Handelman, 500 South Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, Jiffy Lube
Consultant, pointed out that no letters or telephone calls were received
during the three Planning Commission hearings and that they even went to
the Cliff Haven neighborhood to let them know what was happening.
Mr. Handelman reported that the Fanticola family owns six of the top ten
Jiffy Lubes in the country. He stated that this type of business is a
neighborhood service and that the Jiffy Lube could be one of the nicest
buildings on Mariner's Mile. He reported that they have also worked very
closely with Council Member Glover on the logolsign and urged Council to
support the project.
Val Skoro, 1601 Bayadere Terrace, stated that he has not looked at the
detailed designs but that everyone he has spoken with is against having a
Jiffy Lube on Mariner's Mile. He expressed concern relative to the affects
this would have on the overall quality of future: business in the area and
believed that this is the wrong type of business. Council Member Debay
encouraged Mr. Skoro to look at the project designs.
Volume 52 - Page 658
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
10-11
John Faul, 2622 Crestview Drive, believed that this issue was not brought
forward very well to the community and stated that there is a general
consensus against having a Jiffy Lube. He expressed concern relative to the
ingress /egress and the amount of traffic that they may incur.
Mr. Faul stated that there are several oil change locations on Newport
Boulevard and asked how many places are needed to get oil changed. He
hoped that Council does not approve the project, believing that the
community is not as aware of this as Council may believe.
James Santaniello, 1030 West Sharon Road, Santa Ana, stated that he has
built a few projects on Coast Highway and indicated that the owner wants to
build a very quality- oriented building to remove the eyesores that are on
Coast Highway. He stated that he reviewed the plans and believed that,
other than the name, there is no other resemblance to an oil changing
facility.
Mr. Fanticola presented photos of some of the existing bays on Coast
Highway and the types of building materials that will be used. He also
provided a line of sight drawing.
There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing.
Council Member Ridgeway expressed the opinion that the City's parking
code is erroneous and probably should be revisited; however, he believed that
the project provides adequate parking. He stated that he agrees with
Council Member Adams that left turns should be allowed out of the
driveway. He pointed out that Mr. Fanticola has worked closely with the
Mariner's Mile Association and Council Member Glover, and that the
building is gorgeous, is of quality, and will be an asset to the City. He noted
that there are auto dealers, auto part stores, and boat yards on Pacific Coast
Highway now.
Council Member Noyes agreed that the building is nice; however, he believed
that this project will be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property or improvements in the neighborhood. He stated that the City is
taking an area that is trying to have more hospitality uses and allowing the
first auto use. He expressed the opinion that the project would dominate the
site, negatively impact the adjacent uses due to its physical prominence on a
small site, and create more detrimental uses on Mariner's Mile. He believed
that the community does not want it there and that the City does not need it
there. He noted that the City has a specific area plan for Mariner's Mile that
stops at Rocky Point and believed that Council should protect the property
rights of the adjacent properties.
Motion by Council Member Noyes to deny Use Permit 3647.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Council Member Glover stated that Mariner's Mile is a unique area because
papers are not held by many of the property owners. She indicated that she,
Ms. Wood, and Senior Planner Teague established a group consisting of
business owners and community leaders that live in the area to look at a
design framework. That has been done but has yet to come to Council
because they were waiting for the City Manager to become more familiar
Volume 52 - Page 659
i
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
with the area. She believed that Mariner's Mile :is improving. She described
the property history from Dover Drive to the Pelican Wall and explained
what is desired on each site. She asked Council to look at this area more
positively with regard to what is trying to be done. Council Member Glover
stated that, since Jiffy Lube asked for her assistance, she worked with them
to make the best project possible and because she did not intend to "get
stuck" in the same way she is with the Auto Bistro. Council Member Glover
stated that she does not want all of Mariner's Mile to look the same. She
reiterated that there are auto uses on Mariner's Mile and hoped that
everyone understands that the lots on Mariners Mile are extremely narrow,
abut a bluff, and need costly retaining walls.
Council Member Glover stated that the applicant has worked very hard to
make this a good project; spent a lot of time with the landscape architect and
the City's architect; worked personally on this without the use of a lobbyist;
and joined the business association. She agreed that there are
improvements that can happen to Mariner's Mile but hoped that people
realize the good improvements that are there now.
Ms. Temple requested that Condition No. 22 be amended to remove the
requirement for the two -foot berm.
Motion by Council Member Glover to sustain the action of the Planning
Commission, but modify Condition No. 22 and exclude Condition No. 24.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Mayor O'Neil
Noes: Noyes
Abstain: None
Absent: None
20. APPEAL OF THE DENIAL OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CURB CUT ADJACENT TO 510 AND 516
EL MODENA AVENUE IN THE NEWPORT HEIGHTS AREA.
Public Works Director Webb stated that the applicant is requesting
permission to install a drive approach on El Modena to have drive through
from the alley to the street. He reported that there is a Council Policy that
indicates that vehicular access should be taken from the alley if one is
available.
Motion by Council Member Glover to deny the appeal for an
Encroachment Permit to allow construction of a curb cut in El Modena
Avenue at 510 and 516 El Modena Avenue.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil
Noes:
.
None
Abstain:
None
Absent:
None
Volume 52 - Page 660
liu0�1:1
Encroachment Permit
510 & 516 El Modena
(65)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
August 9, 1999
ADJOURNMENT — 9:10 p.m.
The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on August 4, 1999, at
4:00 p.m. on the City Ball Bulletin Board located outside of the City of
Newport Beach Administration Building.
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
Mayor
Volume 52 - Page 661
INDEX
u
0