Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - 05-09-2000City Council Meeting May 23, 2000 Agenda Item ill CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes �� Study Session May 9, 2000 - 4:00 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Present: Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, Thomson, Mayor Noyes Absent: O'Neil (excused) CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. In reference to Item #13, Annexation of Bay Knolls Area, Council Member Glover confirmed with City Manager Bludau that each annexation area would be handled separately. City Manager Bludau stated that the application would include all three areas together, however. He stated that the information is going through the Planning Commission separately and that it's also the way the consultant has been providing it. Council Member Glover suggested that the possibility of annexing Santa Ana Country Club might also be discussed by the City Council, since there is a group that is seeking to have it annexed. City Manager Bludau stated that this would only be included if West Santa Ana Heights were to be considered for annexation. City Manager Bludau stated that the City would be meeting with the City of Costa Mesa in the near future to discuss this possibility. Council Member Glover encouraged the meetings to be held publicly. Council Member Debay referred to the staff report for Item #13 and the indication that the Bay Knolls area would be severed from the Newport Coast/Ridge annexation process. City Manager Bludau confirmed that the application with the Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO) would include all three areas. He added that the decision to include West Santa Ana Heights would have to be determined prior to LAFCO taking any action. Mayor Pro Tern Adams referred to Item #11, Bonita Canyon Sports Park, and asked if the amount of $42,000 for unforeseen work was a sufficient amount or if a contingency would come from somewhere else. Public Works Director Webb stated that if there were significant change orders, next year's budgeted funds would have to be used. He added that there are funds being budgeted for several park fund elements in the 2000 -2001 budget, which could be looked at if the need arises but nothing has been specifically budgeted for the Bonita Canyon Sports Park. Council Member Debay asked if money is being earmarked for the CalTrans 'Vest parcel. Director Webb confirmed that enough money is being budgeted to put down a 10% deposit. Council Member Debay requested that the missing information for Item #19, Economic Analysis of Proposals for Future Use/Development of Marinapark, Volume 53 - Page 326 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 be provided at the evening meeting, referring to the first page of the staff report. Council Member Ridgeway asked if O Hill Partnership had signed the agreement in Item #10, Approval of Subdivision Agreement for Corporate Plaza West. Director Webb stated that he would find out and make sure that the agreement is properly signed before being finished. Council Member Ridgeway additionally asked if 36 months was the normal period to allow for the completion of such improvements. Director Webb responded that the period is usually between 24 and 48 months, depending upon the length of the project. Council Member Ridgeway pointed out that, in this case, the project is already complete and asked if 24 months could be considered. Director Webb stated that some improvements between the two buildings have not been done. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the obligation for Resubdivision 1006 is The Irvine Company's only. Director Webb said he would get more information, but believes that it is a joint responsibility of both parties. Council Member Debay asked for clarification on the boundaries of the resubdivision as indicated in the parcel map in the staff report. Director Webb stated that Parcel 3 is under the control of The Irvine Company and Parcel 1 is under the control of O Hill Partnership. He said that the uncompleted work is the street between the two parcels. He added that the requirements are to improve the circulation in the area and that the street is private. Council Member Ridgeway added that O Hill Partnership is giving up one acre of property to Parcel 3 for The Irvine Company. PARKING METER FEE INCREASE. Transportation & Development Manager Edmonton stated that the staff report was a follow -up to items that had been before the City Council at previous meetings. He stated that the Promote Revitalization of the Peninsula Committee (PROP) made recommendations to the City Council at its meeting of February 8, 2000, with the parking meter fee increase being recommended for immediate implementation. Manager Edmonston referred to the map in the staff report showing the current fees in three zones on the Peninsula and in the Mariners' Mile area. He outlined the recommended increases to these fees. He stated that if the City Council chooses to move forward with the fee increases, staff would prepare the necessary resolution and ordinance to implement the changes. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if any changes were being proposed, or if any were expected, for master parking permits. Manager Edmonston stated that the fee for master parking permits would not change. He added that, although the committees previously available for off- street parking discussions have been disbanded, staff receives only about one call per month and that they're primarily for more permit -type parking in the Cannery Village area and around City Hall. Manager Edmonston explained that the two permits that are the most used Volume 53 - Page 327 INDEX Parking Meter Fee Increase (85) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 .IIiTIx7 are the annual permit, which costs $100, and the master permit, which costs $450. He stated that the annual permit allows the user to park at blue meters or in the Corona del Mar beach and Balboa Pier lots. He stated that the master permit allows the user to park anywhere in the City. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that since the recommended parking meter fee increase is 100 %, he was trying to determine if staff expected a change in the demand for the master permit. City Manager Bludau suggested that a review of the total permits sold could be performed in a year to determine if the demand did change as a result of the fee increase. Manager Edmonston confirmed for Mayor Pro Tem Adams that the recommended fee increase did not include a proposal to change the time restrictions at any of the meters. Council Member Ridgeway noted that since PROP supports the recommended action, he would be in support of it also. He additionally noted that the Cannery Village area would be experiencing many changes within the next six months, and he suggested that the parking issue be addressed in conjunction with those changes. Council Member Debay agreed with the recommendation to increase the meter fees, since out -of -town visitors primarily pay them. She added, however, that since local residents generally purchase the permits, she would not support a rate increase for them. She requested that staff determine if there might be a need to increase the number of blue meters. Manager Edmonston confirmed that the blue meters were originally installed to accommodate the local businesses and residents. He stated that the master permit was later created by the Off - Street Parking Committee. He added that the sale of the annual permit was monitored one year and it was found that approximately two - thirds were purchased by residents and about one -third by business employees who lived out -of -town. Council Member Thomson asked about the earlier reference to the Corona del Mar beach lot. Manager Edmonston explained that the annual permit is good at the beach lots and most of the City's off - street lots. Council Member Debay asked about the beach lots in the West Newport area. Manager Edmonston explained that the West Newport meters are already $1.00 per hour since they are primarily for beach use, and that about half of them are blue meters. Council Member Thomson stated that the City had previously looked at the concept of having a kiosk for payment of parking rather than the use of individual meters. Manager Edmonston confirmed that the City had met with a couple of vendors and contacted cities that were using the system. He stated that the reports were not extremely positive, but that the system has continued to improve. He stated that the City will again consider the use of the kiosk system when looking at the lot that will be expanded as a part of the redevelopment of downtown Balboa. Manager Edmonston stated that the fee increases, if approved, would leave only a few meters in the City at the $0.25 per hour rate. He said these include the meters along Coast Highway from Tustin Avenue to West Volume 53 - Page 328 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 3. Newport, and the meters in the Mariners' Mile lot. He added that these meters are not used frequently, so were not included in the proposal. Council Member Ridgeway noted that the City Council would be looking at an agreement during the evening meeting to convert 50 meters to electronic meters for a trial period of ninety days. He stated his eagerness in receiving the report that will follow the trial period. Manager Edmonston added that the meters will be enhanced electronic meters, and that the City already has some electronic meters. Manager Edmonston confirmed with the Mayor that staff is being directed to prepare a report with a resolution and ordinance for consideration at the City Council meeting of May 23, 2000. FISCAL YEAR 2000 -2001 BUDGET OVERVIEW. City Manager Bludau stated that he planned for the overview at the current meeting to take approximately one hour. He added that the two Study Sessions in June would be entirely dedicated to discussing the budget. He stated that the overview at the current meeting would give a broad look at the framework for the budget and some of the background information. City Manager Bludau began his slide presentation with a graph illustrating total City revenues by source. He said that it is anticipated that the total City revenues for the 2000 -2001 fiscal year will be $124.3 million. He pointed out that the major revenues are property tax, and sales and other taxes. City Manager Bludau then presented a slide that illustrated general fund revenues by source. He stated that the information clearly shows how dependent the City is on sales and property taxes. He outlined the unique features to the City as being no trash collection fee and no utility user tax. He added, however, that the City does have high property tax values and a high property tax base. He confirmed with Administrative Services Director Danner that approximately 20% of the properties in the City are being assessed at pre- Proposition 13 values. Council Member Ridgeway stated that it is closer to 25% and the second highest in the State. City Manager Bludau presented a slide showing how the locally generated sales tax is allocated in the City, with approximately 78% of it going to the State General Fund. He stated that the City receives approximately 13% of the total, which is estimated to be $18.65 million. Council Member Glover confirmed with Director Danner that the total sales tax generated in the City has increased approximately $3 million over the prior two years. Director Danner stated that he would provide information later in the overview on where the increase is coming from. City Manager Bludau stated that copies of the slides could be provided upon request. City Manager Bludau then showed a slide on the sales tax contribution of selected geographic areas, which included Fashion Island, the airport area and the Balboa area. Volume 53 - Page 329 INDEX Budget Overview (40) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 Willo►:i In response to Council Member Glover's question, City Manager Bludau stated that there is not a statistical breakdown available for the Mariners' Mile area. Director Danner stated that the information is received from Municipal Resource Consultants (MRC) and that the company is going out of business, making the information difficult to obtain. City Manager Bludau next presented a slide on the local sales tax by economic segment. He stated that it shows that the 400 restaurants in the City provide 19% of the total sales tax generated, the five car dealers provide 12% and the large department stores provide 11 %. Director Danner added that the top 8% of the companies that pay sales tax contribute 43% of the total dollar value. City Manager Bludau listed the top ten sales tax producers in the third quarter of 1999. The list included David L. Cunningham, Inc., a wholesaler of trees and plants, and DVI Financial Services, a medical equipment lessor. Council Member Thomson pointed out that this provides a good example of how office buildings can generate sales tax. City Manager Bludau presented a slide showing the distribution of property tax, with the City getting 17 %. He pointed out that the City received an additional 3% before the creation of the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF). He stated that approximately $3.5 million is diverted per year, with a total of $27 million diverted over the period. City Manager Bludau stated that cities haven't been able to put a cap on the total or to receive any of the funds back. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question about possible legislation, City Manager Bludau stated that it is frustrating to attempt to put a cap on the total when the funds should really be returned, given the State's budget surplus of $8 to $12 billion. Council Member Debay confirmed with Director Danner that the property tax distribution to other local ER .F represents the money that was taken away from the County and special districts as part of the property tax shift. City Manager Bludau stated that the City is expecting to receive $25.8 million in property tax in the 2000 -2001 fiscal year. City Manager Bludau next presented various property tax numbers. He said that the gross property value of which the property tax is levied is nearly $14 billion. He said that approximately 81% of the parcels in the City are residential and that the single - family home value increased by 12.58% in 1998 -99. Director Danner explained that the 84.40% decrease for industrial value in 1998 -99 represents unsecured property taxes that various industrial companies pay. Council Member Thomson confirmed with City Manager Bludau that the single - family home value is determined by the County Tax Assessor and includes resells and any overall tax increases. It is the value on the books, and not necessarily the market value. Council Member Thomson stated that Volume 53 - Page 330 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX there is a phenomenal revenue opportunity when one considers that 20 to 25% of the homes are being assessed at pre - Proposition 13 values. Mayor Noyes asked for additional information on the unsecured property taxes paid by the industrial companies. Director Danner explained that these taxes are paid by companies and based upon such things as inventory and equipment. City Manager Bludau added that four of the City's largest commercial property owners are requesting value reductions and if approved, could result in an annual property tax revenue loss of approximately $1.2 million. Director Danner referred to the Proposed Revenue Estimates - All Funds chart in the 2000 -2001 Budget Detail. He summarized the information by noting that $25,810,000 is expected in property taxes. Council Member Glover confirmed with Director Danner that the secured property tax of $22 million includes both residential and commercial. City Manager Bludau added that approximately 77% of the total comes from residential. Director Danner continued by noting the sales and use tax, and the uniform transient occupancy tax (UTOT) totals and increases estimated for 2000- 2001. Director Danner confirmed for Council Member Thomson that the UTOT total is the total the City receives, the net total after the Newport Beach Convention & Visitors Bureau receives their share. Director Danner pointed out that the general fund revenue total of $85 million is an increase of 3.28% over the current fiscal year. He added, however, that $4.3 million is expected from the oil spill recovery and, without that, the general fund revenue total would actually be down from the current year. He stated that this decrease is attributed to a decline in building activity and a one -time COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services) More Grant that was received in 1999 -2000. Director Danner noted that the oil spill recovery revenue is listed under Private Refunds & Rebates, 010 -5864, under other revenue in the general fund. Council Member Ridgeway suggested that the oil spill recovery revenue should not be in the general fund, but possibly set up as enterprise fund or another separate fund. Director Danner explained that the money has to be accounted for separately. A separate division in the Capital Improvement Program is being set up to keep it separated, but a separate fund is not being set up. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Public Works Director Webb stated that the money will be used for very specific projects that were put together in competition with the other agencies that were requesting funding. He stated that they City is limited to the projects that were approved by the joint committee. He added that a report is also required and will be submitted to the Attorney General's Office on how the money was spent. City Attorney Burnham stated the Recreational Volume 53 - Page 331 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Resources Subcommittee meets every six months, and a progress report is required at each of these meetings also. Director Webb listed the top projects as including a refurbishment of both piers, improving the streetlights and sidewalks along the oceanfront, upgrading the lifeguard facility, starting the marine education center project and improving some of the restrooms along the oceanfront. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed that that they are all capital improvements being paid for out of the general fund. Council Member Thomson confirmed with Director Webb that the Balboa Island Ferry restroom project is being budgeted, but is not a part of the oil spill recovery expenditures. Council Member Debay stated that there is a strict requirement that the oil spill recovery money be spent in the area that was impacted by the oil spill. Director Danner confirmed for Council Member Ridgeway that the accounting of the oil spill recovery funds would be kept separate. Director Webb stated that the projects being paid for by the oil spill money were not previously budgeted. Council Member Ridgeway additionally confirmed that the pier projects would take care of 95% of the maintenance currently needed. Per Council Member Thomson's question, Director Danner stated that the City has various contingency reserves in not only the general fund, but primarily in the enterprise funds. He said that Council Policy F -3 outlines the requirements for how much money must be set aside each year for maintaining the reserves. Director Danner stated that the City Manager's Transmittal Letter in the Resource Allocation Plan discusses the reserves. He added that most of the reserves are fully funded. In reference to Council Member Thomson's question about the annual replacement of the pier pilings and future pier repairs, Director Webb stated that oil spill money could not be used for long -term future maintenance. He added that the money must be spent in the next eighteen months to two years. Council Member Debay reported that things were going well towards the City receiving its share of the oil spill money, but she has learned that a new attorney in the State Lands Department is looking at the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and has some concerns and questions. City Attorney Burnham added, however, that the State Lands Commission has determined that it doesn't want to participate in the assignment of settlement proceeds and may not be a part of the supplemental MOU. Director Danner concluded the discussion on revenues by stating that the total revenue estimated for all City funds for the 2000 -2001 fiscal year is $125,381,711, a slight decrease over the prior year. City Manager Bludau referred back to the slides and began the discussion on City expenditures. He stated that expenditures for the 2000 -2001 fiscal year, including capital projects, are estimated to total $134.5 million. He Volume 53 - Page 332 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX stated that general fund expenditures are estimated to total $79.5 million, with the slight increase from the prior year attributed to negotiated employee salary adjustments. He added that most department maintenance and operation, and capital budgets are remaining flat. City Manager Bludau listed the six new positions that are being recommended in the proposed budget. Referring to a slide illustrating total City expenditures by class, Director Danner stated that salaries and benefits account for nearly half of the City's total budget in the 2000 -2001 fiscal year. He said this is followed by capital improvements, and maintenance and operation, both at 24 %. He stated that other charges primarily include debt service payments, and that capital outlay at only 1% of the total City budget is spent on such things as computers and office machines. City Manager Bludau noted that 24% being spent on capital improvements is a much larger percent than is found in most cities. Council Member Ridgeway asked if a pie chart was created to show what percent salaries and benefits are of the operating budget, as was done with the total budget. Director Danner said that a pie chart has not been created, but he knows that salaries and benefits are approximately 70% of the operating budget compared to 49% of the total budget. Director Danner reviewed a slide that used a graph to compare the governmental revenues and expenditures over the last ten fiscal years, and pointed out that expenditures exceeded revenues in the early 1990'x. He explained that the current budget year is again looking at expenditures exceeding revenues, because revenues received in prior years are expected to be spent in the upcoming fiscal year. Council Member Glover confirmed that this was an accounting issue and asked what the following fiscal year would look like. City Manager Bludau explained that the major change from year to year will be with capital improvements and when projects are being done. Council Member Glover asked if 25% is generally representative of the amount of the total budget that is spent on capital improvements. Director Danner stated that he did not know what the percentages used to be, but he knows that the spending went down in the mid- 1990's due to a downturn in the economy. Council Member Glover asked how the determination was made on what percent of the budget should be spent on capital improvements. City Manager Bludau stated that staff submits their requests for projects, and Director Webb reviews them and makes recommendations. City Manager Bludau stated that fewer projects are recommended for funding than are submitted, and that a balance is sought between operations and making sure the community sees the benefit of the projects. Council Member Glover stated that she has been questioned by many people about where the money is going, and she said that it looks like if capital improvements were decreased, expenditures would not exceed revenues. City Manager Bludau stated that there is a maintenance of effort requirement, in terms of the amount of general fund money that is put into Volume 53 - Page 333 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 IQi17�1:i capital improvements. He stated that this requirement totals approximately $8 million. City Manager Bludau noted that maintenance of effort does not necessarily mean maintenance, but is for capital improvements. Council Member Glover referred to a previous slide that separated maintenance and capital improvements. Council Member Ridgeway clarified that the City has an operating budget of approximately $85 million and a total budget of approximately $125 million. He stated that the money that makes up the difference between the two includes enterprise funds and other funds, with only $9 million from the general fund. Director Danner referred to a slide that showed what happened to assessed valuations and property tax collections when ERAF started in 1992 -1993. He stated that property tax collections and assessed valuations were nearly equal that year. He said that in recent years, the property tax collections have increased and exceed assessed valuations, because of the robust economy. City Manager Bludau added that the chart illustrates that it has taken nine years for the City to get back to where it was in 1991 in regards to property tax collections. Director Danner showed a slide that presented public safety expenditures compared to tax revenues. He pointed out that in recent years, the revenue from property tax and sales tax has been able to completely fund the public safety expenditures for police, fire and marine. Council Member Glover confirmed with Director Danner that the public safety budget is over $40 million. She stated that property tax revenue used to cover police services, but that the chart combines property and sales taxes, and all public safety expenditures. Director Danner went on to look at a slide showing selected comparisons with other Orange County cities. He said that the report was presented at a previous City Council meeting. Council Member Thomson requested that the City Council receive a copy of the slides being shown as well as the notations being made. Director Danner continued to look at the County comparison chart and noted that Newport Beach ranked third among the cities in the County for revenue per capita and sixth in sales tax. City Manager Bludau stated that the comparison shows both per capita and rank among the 33 cities. Council Member Glover stated that Newport Beach should have a higher per capita rank than fourth for UTOT. Director Danner agreed and noted the overall rank of second for UTOT. He added that the City is proud of its ranking of first in per capita spending on public safety. City Manager Bludau said that the figure is misleading because so much of the public safety efforts are to accommodate visitors to the area. Council Member Debay asked if the other coastal cities use County and State resources to provide lifeguard and beach services. City Manager Bludau Volume 53 - Page 334 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX stated that it varies and is really a mixture. City Manager Bludau next showed a graph that illustrated the number of full time employees over the past ten years and in the proposed 2000 -2001 budget. He stated that the City had its most full time employees in 1990- 1991, its least in 1995 -1996 and is proposing a total of 706 for 2000 -2001. Director Danner stated that he would have to look up the numbers to answer Council Member Ridgeway's question regarding the percentage of new full time employees since 1995 -1996 who were public safety employees. City Manager Bludau added, however, that three of the six new positions being proposed for 2000 -2001 are public safety positions. Director Danner referred back to the Budget Detail and Operating Expenditures - All Funds. He stated that the chart provides a three -year history of expenditures. He also referred to Operating Expenditures by Department. He noted some of the expenditure totals that were illustrated in a previous pie chart. He stated that operating expenditures in the proposed 2000 -2001 budget for all funds are just over $95 million, which is a 0% increase over the previous year. He stated that this is due to several retro pays and a large sum of money for airport growth control spent in the current fiscal year. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Director Danner that the $95 million was exclusive of the $9 million for capital improvements. Director Danner invited any of the City Council members or the public to see Administrative Services Deputy Director Kurth or himself to go over the budget in any detail desired. City Manager Bludau moved on to the next slide, which showed airport growth control spending from 1980 -1981 through the current proposed budget. He noted that the proposed budget includes $250,000 for airport growth control spending and is down substantially from the year prior. He said the City Council might want to make the decision to increase this spending. Council Member Glover asked for details regarding the contract with Peggy Ducey. City Manager Bludau explained that when the 12 -month contract expires in August of 2000, the City has the option to either rehire her as a staff member or pay her one - year's severance. City Manager Bludau referred to a new slide and listed some of the key capital improvement projects for 2000 -2001. He summarized that 147 projects make up the capital improvement program and they total $25.9 million. City Manager Bludau concluded by stating that the proposed budget is really a status quo budget and at the next budget meeting, he would cover the changes in each department and then go through the budget page by page, and answer any questions. Volume 53 - Page 335 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 Council Member Glover asked about the fixed income budget she requested at a previous meeting. City Manager Bludau stated that staff could provide a proposal on where it would reduce expenditures if the estimated increase of $1 million in general fund revenues did not occur. Council Member Ridgeway clarified with Council Member Glover that she wanted to look at a fixed income budget with no new revenues, rather than a balanced budget. 4. PROPOSED HARBOR ELEMENT AND HARBOR COMMISSION Deputy City Manager Kiff presented a report on the City's request for a dredging permit before the California Coastal Commission, at a meeting held earlier in the day in Santa Rosa. He stated that he and Fire & Marine Deputy Chief Melum attended the meeting and had two items on the agenda. Deputy City Manager Kiff provided an overhead projection which listed various issues such as beach nourishment and ocean disposal, and compared what was proposed by the Coastal Commission with what the City asked for and what was agreed upon. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that his biggest disappointment of the day was not coming to agreement on the beach disposal sand threshold. He stated that the Federal Consistency Supervisor was insistent that the Coastal Commission not approve a blanket permit to allow anything other than dredge material with 80% sand or more, or within 10% of the sand content on the receiving beach. Deputy City Manager Kiffs overhead projection specified that the City was asking for dredge material with 80 %, sand or more, or within 40% of the sand content on the receiving beach if dredged with a hydraulic dredge. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the Federal Consistency Supervisor was willing to approve individual permits at the lower sand content, but not a blanket permit. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the Coastal Commission did agree to revisit the issue if the City performed more testing on bay water quality. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Deputy City Manager Kiff that the Coastal Commission voted at the meeting held earlier in the day and did not approve the City's request for the lower sand content level. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the Coastal Commission's concern is with the toxicity of the sediment, and requested that the City run additional tests to prove that the sediment is not toxic. Deputy City Manager Kiff continued through the list of issues and where agreement was reached. He stated that the City did not contest two of the three eelgrass issues, but did contest the issue about where to mitigate. He stated that the proposed condition by the Coastal Commission was that if eelgrass is impacted, it must be mitigated on site. He stated that this makes mitigation the most expensive part of the dredging project. He stated that the City was able to convince the Coastal Commission that if eelgrass is impacted, the mitigation can occur offsite. He stated that this was approved for a location yet to be determined, but will most likely be a part of the City's eelgrass restoration plan. Volume 53 - Page 336 INDEX Harbor Element & Harbor Commission (24) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Council Member Glover asked how often residents need to dredge. Deputy City Manager Kiff, with the help of the audience, stated that it's probably once every five to six years but depends upon the location of the dredging. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the City did not contest the permit term. He continued to the next issue on the list, areas off limits, which the City contested on the point of the method to be used to get off limit areas back in. He stated that the City asked for areas to be automatically allowed back in if proven clean through additional testing. He stated that the Coastal Commission approved the areas to be rapidly allowed back in, but not automatically. Deputy City Manager Kiff concluded with the issue on jurisdictional review. He stated that the proposal was for the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission to approve individual dredging applications under the blanket permit. He stated that the City asked to approve the individual applications within the City, with the Coastal Commission reviewing what the City was doing and revisiting the issue if they felt the City was not doing a good job. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the Coastal Commission stated that they do not have the legal authority to delegate the responsibility to the City, but that they did encourage the Coastal Commission staff to expedite the processing of all applications. In response to Mayor Noyes' question, Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that it will take two to three months to do the additional testing. He added that the City might be receiving some money to help pay for the testing from the TMDL grants being applied for by the Regional Board, but it will not hold up the testing process. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the bio -assay tests are complicated because they're trying to prove that the water and bay floor will allow plant and small life forms to live, and it takes time to prove this. Ralph Rodheim, member of the Ad Hoc Harbor Committee, stated that it has been a pleasure to serve on the Harbor Committee and that the Committee has spent a year looking at every aspect of the bay, the harbor, and upper and lower bay. He stated that the harbor is unique with residential, commercial and recreation uses. He stated that the Committee wanted to look at each of the elements, with emphasis being placed on the residents. Mr. Rodheim stated that the proposed Harbor Element of the General Plan, prepared by the Committee, addresses these issues and he'd like to see the process move forward in adopting it. He stated that the document was prepared with the help of input from citizens, the charter industry, the fishing industry, recreational boating and the environmental industry. He stated that it has resulted in a balanced document and includes every constituent that has an interest in the harbor. He thanked City staff, particularly Assistant City Manager Wood and Senior Planner Alford, and Council Members Glover and Ridgeway and Mayor Noyes. Mr. Rodheim stated that other Committee members were also present in the audience to answer any questions. Referring to the statistics presented earlier in the meeting that 81% of the Volume 53 - Page 337 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX parcels in the City are residential, Council Member Ridgeway commented about the appropriateness of the proposed Harbor Element being residential friendly. He also stated that he felt that the document was one of the best policy documents presented to the City Council in quite some time. He stated that it doesn't state regulations, but provides for a balance. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked about the environmental documentation needed to establish the Harbor Element in the General Plan. Planning Director Temple stated that it could be done through a negative declaration, and would require public hearings at both the Planning Commission and the City Council if it is to become a part of the General Plan. Council Member Debay referred to the staff report and the statement that the proposed Harbor Commission could make recommendations concerning land use and property development applications affecting harbor activities. She asked if this meant that a restaurant applying for a permit on a bay front location would be required to go before the Harbor Commission prior to going before the Planning Commission. Mr. Rodheim stated that it is recommended to form a Harbor Commission and bring a higher level of expertise to focus on the water and all of the related elements. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the answer to Council Member Debay's question is that a bay front restaurant would not have to go before the Harbor Commission. However, he also referred to goal HB -1 in the proposed Harbor Element, which includes maintaining a balance of compatible uses while allowing water - enhanced commercial activities such as dining. He said that the proposed Harbor Commission's intent is not to add another level of regulation. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the powers and duties of the proposed Harbor Commission need to be more clearly defined, and he asked if the Harbor Commission would replace the Harbor Committee and the Harbor Quality Committee. Mr. Rodheim stated that it would replace the Harbor Committee, but that there would still be a need for the Harbor Quality Committee. Council Member Ridgeway agreed that the Harbor Quality Committee would have to remain, since it is more back bay focused while the Harbor Commission would be lower bay focused. He added that the upper bay issues are very complex since they involve many jurisdictions. Additionally, he referred to the recent reorganization of the Marine Environmental Division and the many issues it will be involved with in the lower bay area and how that would tie in with the new Harbor Commission. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the Deputy City Manager is the common thread between the upper and lower bay issues. Council Member Glover stated that she did not anticipate that the Harbor Commission would handle any grievances and she would not agree with them doing so. She added, however, that the City does need a group that is committed to the water and activities on the water, but she doesn't think they should operate like a Planning Commission for the water. Volume 53 - Page 338 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Mr. Rodheim stated that the Harbor Commission would bring the stakeholders into the process. Council Member Debay referred to the proposed powers and duties of the Harbor Commission as presented in the staff report, and said she could not support the Harbor Commission making recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council on applications concerning land use and property development that may affect harbor activities. Mr. Rodheim cited an example of what would happen if the Cannery Restaurant and the Schock Boats property became residential parcels. He stated that a Harbor Commission should be able to make a recommendation about the consequences of losing the commercial element for the boating industry, but he is not asking for the Harbor Commission to have any power to make the final decision. Council Member Thomson suggested that the powers and duties of the Harbor Commission be more on the level of the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission rather than that of the Planning Commission, with any decisions recallable by the City Council. Council Member Thomson referred to the proposed powers and duties as presented in the staff report, and stated that serving as an appellant and reviewing body for decisions of the Deputy City Manager is stated in terms that are too broad. Council Member Thomson suggested that the specific matters that the Harbor Commission would review should be given. He added that the selection process for the members should also be more clearly defined. Mr. Rodheim agreed that these types of issues need to be discussed. He stated that the Harbor Commission only wants to help the Planning Commission and the City Council, and not replace any of their decision - making authority. Council Member Thomson stated his support for the concept of a Harbor Commission, but is wary of it being too commercially oriented. He stated that stakeholders should be considered as everyone who lives or owns property in the City. Mr. Rodheim agreed. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the intent is not to create a dynasty, but to provide a group that is not more regulatory or controlling. Mayor Noyes agreed that there are issues to clear up and asked how the process to form a Harbor Commission should proceed. Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that he would support the existing Harbor Committee better defining the powers and duties of the proposed Harbor Commission, but that the policies contained in the proposed Harbor Element seem to need no additional work. Mr. Rodheim agreed and thanked the City Council for their support. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated his concern that the Planning Commission might not focus on the harbor as much if there was the existence of the Harbor Commission, since they would know that there is another body who Volume 53 - Page 339 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 is handling those issues. INDEX Council Member Ridgeway stated that the Planning Commission has never reviewed anything on the bay, to his knowledge. He said they have reviewed water - enhanced restaurants and walkways, but he doesn't see the overlap between the two commissions. Planning Director Temple stated that the Planning Commission can only approve a project if there is the finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan. She stated that if the Harbor Element were a part of the General Plan, the Planning Commission would have to consider the policies in the Harbor Element when deciding whether to approve a project and include them in their findings. She stated that the water and land wouldn't cross, but the policies of both would be involved in the decision- making process. Council Member Ridgeway agreed and stated that there is some language in the proposed Harbor Element that needs to be changed so that it does not appear that property rights are being taken away. He stated that he would also like to see language added that makes it clear that commercial requests can not be inconsistent with the residential community. Planning Director Temple clarified for Council Member Debay that any change in use, if subject to a discretionary permit or action by the Planning Commission or City Council, would need to be evaluated in light of the policies in the Harbor Element. She stated that there are many permitted land uses in the waterfront commercial districts, but a change in land use would require findings consistent with the General Plan. Council Member Ridgeway stated that "is no longer economically viable or is obsolete or replaced elsewhere" needs to be deleted from the third implementation strategy listed in the staff report for Objective 1113-1.5. He stated that the standard, as written, is putting a restriction on the change of use by landowners. He said the deletion will increase the ability for the decision makers to decide on a change of use. Council Member Thomson stated that there are many new disciplines involved with the issues being addressed by the proposed Harbor Commission, and the formation of the Commission should be carefully thought out to work in concept with all of the policies of the City. Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that the Harbor Element document include realistic expectations for the residential character on the bay. He cited the example of a bay front homeowner not being able to expect the same peace and quiet that someone living in Cameo Highlands might have. Council Member Ridgeway stated his understanding of Mayor Pro Tern Adams' concern. Council Member Glover stated that there is no promise anywhere in the City that a resident will have peace and quiet, referring to the weddings that take place in some of the parks in the City. She stated her concern that Volume 53 - Page 340 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 9, 2000 waterfront property issues will have one more layer to go through, when there are already the Coastal Commission, the Planning Commission, the City Council and the many individuals who watch these issues closely. She stated that she'd like to have many of the waterfront parcels in the Mariners' Mile area kept for marine uses. John Corrough stated that he is a waterfront property owner who does not have unrealistic expectations. He stated that he has been honored to be a part of the process as a member of the Harbor Committee. He stated that the members of the Committee really walked in each other's shoes and tried very hard to understand the position of the other person. He added that he also played the role of consultant on the Committee. Mr. Corrough concluded by stating that, as a consultant, he was impressed with the quality of the effort from such a broad -based group of people. PUBLIC COMMENTS -None. ADJOURNMENT - 6:15 p.m. xxxxxxx * * * * * * * * * * * * * *txxxxxxxxx The agenda for the Study Session was posted on May 4, 2000, at 11:30 a.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 53 - Page 341 INDEX CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Regular Meeting DRAFT May 9, 2000 - 7:00 p.m INDEX - 4:UU p.m. ltteter to separate minutes] CLOSED SESSION - 6:15 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Absent: None Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member Ridgeway. Invocation by Senior Executive Pastor Jim Russell, Mariners Church. Presentation of National Public Works Week Proclamation. Public Works Director Webb read the proclamation and noted that some of the accolades also belongs to the General Services Department since this honors all employees in the City that work so hard to make the public facilities usable and safe. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): Mayor Pro Tem Adams reported that he received junk email selling devices that trigger the emergency preemption devices for traffic signals. He requested a report relative to whether the City has a law that prohibits the use of those types of devices. Mayor Noyes apologized to the Comcast crew, especially to Jeff (last meeting's director), for stating that they were late starting the April 25 Council meeting because of Comcast. He indicated that Council was late getting out of Closed Session deliberations and that Comcast was set up for the meeting. He added that Comcast videotapes the meetings at no charge to the City as a public service and expressed his appreciation to them. Mayor Noyes announced that Balboa Island will be holding its Annual Art Walk on May 15, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Adams provided a report on the Newport - Ensenada Yacht Race. He indicated that he and his wife were treated very well while they were in Ensenada and that he brought back a number of plaques from various organizations and the Ensenada Mayor to thank the City for its Volume 53 - Page 342 ' National Public Works Week/Commendation (35) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX contribution to the race. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES/ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 25, 2000. 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 Clerk to read by title only. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION S. RESOLUTION ADJUSTING THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY CLERK. Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -33 adjusting the compensation of the City Clerk. 4. DESIGNATION OF LIAISON AGENT FOR THE DIVISION OF OIL, GAS, AND GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES. 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -34 appointing a City agent for the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources; and 2) authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a "Designation of Agent" form, naming the Utilities Manager, Eldon Davidson, to serve as the City of Newport Beach's Liaison Agent regarding matters pertaining to the operation and maintenance of the City's oil and gas facilities, as regulated by the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources. 5. FUNDING REQUEST SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION. Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -35 authorizing the submittal of a Funding Request Form in the amount of $21,630 to the Department of Conservation's Recycling Division. 6. ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PARS (PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SYSTEM) TRUST AGREEMENT. Adopt Resolution No. 2000 -36 to: 1) adopt the Amended and Restated PARS Trust Agreement; 2) appoint the Human Resources Manager, or the successor or designee, as the City's Plan Administrator for the Public Agency Retirement System; 3) authorize the Plan Administrator to execute the documents as the Plan Administrator of the PARS Trust Agreement; and 4) authorize the Plan Administrator to take whatever additional administrative actions are necessary to maintain participation in PARS. ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION 7. Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 8. BALBOA VILLAGE PHASE I - ADDITIONAL SERVICES. Approve and Volume 53 - Page 343 Res 2000 -33/C -3080 City Clerk Compensation (38) Res 2000 -34 Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (28) Res 2000 -35 Department of Conservation Funding (44) Res 2000 -36 PARS Trust Agreement (66) C -3339 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Ron Baers of Planning and Urban Design Resources to provide additional design services as they relate to public infrastructure improvements in the Balboa Village commercial area. 9. Removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway. 10. Removed at the request of an audience member. 11. BONITA CANYON SPORTS PARK - AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3270). 1) Award contract to Contractor No. 6 (Castello, Inc.) for the total contract price of $6,276,000, which is the Base Bid plus Alternate Bid Items No. 2 and No. 5, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; 2) establish an amount of $42,000 to cover the cost of unforeseen work; and 3) authorize a budget amendment (BA -058) appropriating $394,000 from the Bonita Canyon bond proceed improvement fund to Bonita Canyon Sports Park Account No. 7441- C4120434 and transfer $100,000 from Sewer Pump Station Master Plan Improvements Account No. 7532 - 05600100 to a new Bonita Canyon Sports Park Account No. 7532- C4120434 and transfer $48,000 from Freeway Reservation Park Account No. 7021 - C4120375 to a new Bonita Canyon Sports Park Account No. 7021- C4120434. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 12. TRANSFER OF FUNDS IN THE PARKS DIVISION. Approve a budget amendment (13A -059) to transfer $50,000 from Account No. 3170 -7000 (Parks Maintenance - Regular Salaries) to Account No. 3170 -8080 (Parks Maintenance - Services Prof/Tech) to fund contract labor and contracted maintenance services for the reminder of Fiscal Year 1999 -2000. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (7, 9 and 10). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Regarding Agenda Item No. 11, City Clerk Harkless announced that Contractor No. 6 was Castello, Inc. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 1.12 OF THE NBMC. Council Member Ridgeway reported that the amendment allows the Police Department to designate Police Volunteers, under certain circumstances, to issue citations on private property for handicap parking violations, and that Subsection A of the proposed ordinance gives Police Department staff the power to issue citations for any violation of this code. Volume 53 - Page 344 Balboa Village Design Guidelines (38) C -3270 BA -058 Bonita Canyon Sports Park (38/40) BA -059 Park Maintenance (62) Chapter 1.12/ Citations and Warrants (70) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Police Chief McDonell clarified that the ordinance has language that permits the Police Chief to designate which staff has the authority to enforce the various codes. He reported that it was found that the previous ordinance was so specific that it became out of date as it changed. It was the City Attorney's recommendation to broaden the language. He indicated that this language is similar to the Fire and Marine Cheifs authority to designate employees. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he does not mind if a deputized employee of the Police Department is given authority to issue limited parking violations, but indicated that as written the Police Chief can instruct his secretary to give citations for parking violations around the City. He indicated that he would rather have a limitation rather than a broadening of the ordinance. Chief McDonell indicated that they currently have a vast amount of enforcement discretion and that they would hear if they are not using that discretion wisely. He assured that they use their discretionary authority judiciously and that this practice is not new to law enforcement. In response to City Manager Bludau's question, Council Member Ridgeway explained that parking violations are a daily part of his constituents' life and is a sensitive subject on the peninsula. He indicated that, in his experience with parking enforcement on the peninsula, the Police Department is not tolerant and sometimes rude. He stated that he is supportive of good enforcement but has concerns with expanding the power to issue parking citations. Reporting that the Police Department enforces handicap violations on a complaint basis right now, Chief McDonell stated that from personal experience, there is a huge problem with people in the community fragrantly using handicap spaces when they are not entitled to them. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Chief McDonell stated that he does not mind changing the language to limit the deputization of a volunteer to only issue citations for handicap violations on private or public parking spaces. He explained that the language was not only meant for the volunteers and reiterated that the language is similar to what is in existence for the Fire and Marine Chief to designate members of his staff to enforce certain codes. He added that the ordinance also provides flexibility since the Police Department constantly changes titles, classifications, and sometimes responsibilities. Motion by Council Member Ridaewav to continue this item to the May 23, 2000 Council meeting. Mayor Noyes asked about the statement that the Police Department currently enforces handicap violations on a complaint basis. Chief McDonell explained that they do not have the staffing to address this. He stated that an officer may issue a citation if he drives by a violator, but their primary focus is not to be looking for those types of violations. He added that some work needs to be done with property owners to survey the handicap spaces since they are sometimes not marked properly for enforcement. Council Member Ridgeway clarified a previous statement, emphasizing that he is not casting aspersions on the Police Department and apologized if it appears that way. He explained that he has a greater concern in his Volume 53 - Page 345 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 community relative to parking issues. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 9. CONTRACT WITH INNOVAPARK FOR THE SMART METER TRIAL PROGRAM. Council Member Ridgeway reported that there has been two changes to the contract which adds an insurance clause and a Council review at the end of the 90 -day period to determine if the electronic meter program should continue. City Attorney Burnham added that the agreement has been given to InnovaPark representatives and that they are in agreement with the changes. He stated that copies of the modified agreement have also been placed on the table with the staff reports. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a contract with InnovaPark LLC, as amended. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 10. APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR CORPORATE PLAZA WEST (RESUBDIVISION NO. 1006). Public Works Director Webb reported that The Irvine Company (TIC) was conditioned by the Planning Commission to complete certain improvements prior to recording the parcel map. TIC has completed development but has not completed the roadway from Farallon Drive to Clubhouse Drive. He stated that TIC and O Hill Partners are willing to post bonds totaling $78,000 that guarantees the roadway completion. He indicated that $62,000 is from TIC and $16,000 is from TIC, in the name of O Hill Partners, although all of the bonds are signed by TIC. The bonds would be released once the improvements are completed. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Webb stated that O Hill Partners is part of the subdivision agreement but the bonds are in the name of The Irvine Company for O Hill Partners portion of the requirement. Council Member Ridgeway asked if a signature block should be included for Mr. O Hill. Mr. Webb recommended that this item be continued to resolve this issue and to get all parties together. Council Member Ridgeway indicated that he is satisfied that the documentation is complete, but indicated that he faxed the agreement to Mr. O Hill. Volume 53 - Page 346 C -3344 Smart Meter Program (38) Resub 1006 Corporate Plaza West (84) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Robert O Hill, 1 Upper Newport Plaza, O Hill Partners, stated that O Hill Partners is the owner of Parcels 1 and 2, and that O Hill Partners and TIC are owners of Parcel 3. He provided Council with correspondence that explains his request. He noted that the roadway from Farallon Drive to Clubhouse Drive would be built on their property and a portion of property that they are deeding to TIC after the parcel map is recorded. He indicated that an extremely hazardous condition exists and that the road is intended to alleviate that condition. He stated that they believe that the road should have been built at the time Corporate Plaza West was built, but now they feel that the road should be built before the parcel map is recorded. He indicated that they do not mind the roadway being built in a timely manner, but took issue that the subdivision agreement allows three years. He added that they have never seen the plans for the roadway and reported that TIC has refused to let them see the plans on numerous occasions. Mr. O Hill stated that O Hill Partners would like the plans completed before the subdivision agreement is entered into and would like the plans made part of the subdivision agreement. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to continue this item to the May 23, 2000 Council meeting. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS Dr. Alison Stanley requested that Council place a proclamation or resolution on a future agenda that states that the City will continue to not display or exploit wild or exotic animals for public entertainment or amusement. She provided Council with a copy of the proclamation/resolution. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, provided Council with correspondence regarding the "Newport Beach Traffic Planning and Improvements: Traffic Phasing Ordinance" petition (commonly known as Redlight). He believed that it is unclear what affects this would have if adopted, no one knows how it works, and it gives special status to three details of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). He expressed concern that people can vote to change the law so it disagrees with the Charter. However, if the law and the Charter must agree, then people cannot just vote to amend the TPO but must also amend the Charter. This means using a different section of the Elections Code, writing the petitions in a different format, and acquiring more signatures on the petitions. He stated that the City Attorney's summary does not say anything about amending the Charter if the people want the TPO amended, presuming that the law and the Charter can disagree. He urged Council to request a ruling on this from the City Attorney as soon as possible so that voters can make an informed decision on whether or not to sign the petition. Volume 53 - Page 347 Proclamation/ Animal Control (70) TPO Petition (39) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX PUBLIC HEARING 13. ANNEXATION OF BAY KNOLLS AREA. Res 2000 -37 Ord 2000 -8 Planning Director Temple reported that entitlement actions need Council GPA 99 -3(A) approval in order to submit the completed application for the annexation of Annexation of Bay Knolls to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). She also Bay Knolls Area pointed out that a new zoning district was designed, which merged County (21/45) and Costa Mesa zoning documents, in order to support the annexation and to minimize the creation of legal non - conformances which require extra processing if residents wish to make changes to their house. Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Rideewav to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -37 approving General Plan Amendment 99 -3(A); and introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -8 approving Amendment 901 and passed to second reading on May 23, 2000. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CONTINUED BUSINESS 14. UNSCHEDULED VACANCY ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Planning Commission Council voted for the unscheduled vacancy on the Planning Commission, as Vacancy follows: (24) Barry Eaton - Adams Earl McDaniel - Debay, O'Neil, and Mayor Noyes Christi Bettingen - Thomson, Glover, and Ridgeway City Clerk Harkless announced that Council may vote for either Earl McDaniel or Christi Bettingen next since they each received three votes. By the following vote, Earl McDaniel was appointed to fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission which was created as a result of the resignation of Richard Fuller (term expires 6/30/03): Earl McDaniel - Adams, Debay, O'Neil, and Mayor Noyes Christi Bettingen - Thomson, Glover, and Ridgeway 15. STATUS REPORT ON SANTIAGO DRIVE SPEED REDUCTION Santiago Drive PROGRAM (contd. from 3/28/00, 4/11/00 & 4/25/00). Speed Reduction (85) Volume 53 - Page 348 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston reported that Council approved a program in October 1999 that raised the speed limit on Santiago Drive, between Irvine and Tustin Avenues, from 25 to 30 mph to enable the Police Department to introduce an enforcement program. The program also involved collecting extensive data on Santiago Drive, Windward Lane, Francisco Drive, and Holiday Road, and on 23rd Street so that it can be determined if traffic shifted. He indicated that the City contracted with an outside firm to collect the data. Data was collected prior to making any changes, one month after the program was implemented, and after three months. He reviewed the analysis and indicated that the data was collected by using equipment that has two rubber hoses that were placed a fixed distance apart across the street and that counted the amount of traffic. This assisted the Police Department in knowing when their enforcement activity would be most productive. He stated that the equipment is not as accurate as radar but is a good indicator and explained that the street was chosen because there was less of a chance that the counts would be sabotaged. He reported that speed data was gathered with the use of a handheld radar device, that each sample on the chart represents over 100 vehicles, and the radar count reflects the vehicle's top speed /end of acceleration. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' questions, Mr. Edmonton showed where the tubes were placed and stated that the firm of TSI (Traffic Studies Inc.) collected the data. He noted that they have used other companies in the past but found their data to be consistently reliable. Mr. Edmonston reported that the traffic volume and speeds decreased on Santiago Drive. Prior to the program, the 85 percentile speed (speed that traffic engineers use as the upper speed limit that a reasonable motorist might drive) was measured at 39 mph; after the one month period in which the Police Department only gave warnings, it was about 38 or 39 mph; and after the three month period in which citations had been issued, it dropped to 35 to 37 mph. He indicated that the Police Department scaled back their enforcement since the results satisfied one of the criteria in which speeds decreased due to enforcement by at least 2 mph. Mr. Edmonton reported that another component of the speed reduction program is to develop a neighborhood traffic program which creates a menu of techniques that have been tried and found useful in other places, along with a criteria of where the methods might be used; and to develop preliminary proposals for Santiago Drive, Windward Lane, Francisco Drive, and Holiday Road. This should be completed within two to three weeks. After that, he envisions that they would sit down with the community, have the consultant explain why he feels his recommendation is the most appropriate method, and receive feedback. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked about the average speed statistic and the need for sidewalks on this stretch of Santiago Drive. Mr. Edmonton reported that the highest speeds that were recorded with the radar gun were up to 60 mph before the program and between 41 to 44 mph in the most recent readings. Regarding sidewalks, he indicated that the Public Works Department addressed this early on in discussions but there has not been Volume 53 - Page 349 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX any support from the residents since the lack of sidewalks creates a different feel in the neighborhood. Regarding the monitoring machine, Mr. Edmonton reported that the Police Department deploys this equipment periodically but that there was concern that the data received from it was skewed because of its visibility. Council Member Debay asked if cameras have been used for speed control. Mr. Edmonton reported that, a number of years ago, Pasadena had an extensive camera program for photo enforcement of red light violations; however, the courts ultimately dismissed citations by the thousand because they have not bought into that process even though it is provided for in the Vehicle Code. He added that the San Jose Department of Transportation still uses cameras but only in residential neighborhoods, and that the program costs about $200,000 a year. In response to Council Member Glover's questions, Mr. Edmonston confirmed that the City has a consultant who is working on a solution for all four streets and that he has been working for about six weeks. He indicated that the consultant has not met with the neighborhood yet because the City only asked him to measure the streets, work with aerial photos, and mark driveways. The consultant has prepared a rough proposal which was reviewed earlier this week and that he is fine tuning it in preparation for discussions with the residents. He stated that the consultant has looked at a number of solutions, including speed bumps, and has reviewed traffic volume, speeds, and intersection and driveway locations. Council Member Glover believed that speed bumps are a viable solution, but that they could not be installed due to its previous designation. Further, that this is the reason the City met with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and Costa Mesa to get the street redesignated. She stated that she would strongly like to see speed bumps included in the proposal. Mr. Edmonston stated that he made it clear to the consultant that he needs to include more than one type of traffic calming method and explain his position. Regarding the redesignation, he clarified that the City had to go before OCTA for approval of any form of traffic calming on Santiago Drive and that they required the downgrade to a two -lane street (collector street) as long as sufficient capacity is maintained to handle the existing and forecasted volumes. He indicated that this is easily doable with most of the techniques they are reviewing. He believed that a public hearing will probably be held on this issue once the proposal is completed and the consultant has met with the community. Referencing the minutes from the September 27, 1999 Council meeting, Council Member Debay indicated that she confirmed with Mr. Edmonston that nothing could be done to calm the traffic on the street if the downgrade of Santiago Drive had not been accomplished. She stated that she was present at the meeting with OCTA and that the only thing the City could have done at that point was to conduct enforcement and not perform any traffic calming measures. She added that OCTA allowed the traffic calming as long as the calming did not reduce the capacity below the street demand and indicated that placing speed bumps on a collector street tends to force cars out to abutting streets. This drew them to look at other traffic calming Volume 53 - Page 350 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 measures, i.e. ballooning out the curbs, different street striping. INDEX In response to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' question, Mr. Edmonston reported that Lew Gluesing and Ed Cline are from Willdan Associates and that the firm was selected because of their experience in this area. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the City could not have picked anyone better than Mr. Cline. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions regarding the right -of- way, Mr. Edmonston reported that there is a minimum of 10 feet of right -of- way beyond the curb face; however, he pointed out that there is some irregularities with the property lines. Public Works Director Webb reported that the street was originally constructed with a 60 foot right -of -way, but it required an 80 foot right -of -way as redevelopment occurred since the street was on the Master Plan as a secondary arterial highway. Now that Santiago Drive is downgraded, he stated that the City does have the option of vacating some of the parcels to have a straight right -of -way. Mr. Edmonston indicated that the consultant will probably include a sidewalk recommendation because it is a way of addressing the traffic issue. Mr. Edmonston clarified that the six month trial period ends one month from today. Following that time, they would conduct another round of seven-day traffic counts, radar studies, etc. to determine if speeds have gone back up with the reduced level of enforcement. The consultant would then be in a position to start meeting with the community in that timeframe. He reported that the consultant's full report will not be back to Council in a month, but would like the overall guidelines back to Council for review at a study session as soon as possible. Mayor Noyes emphasized that a deadline needs to be set because the community has been waiting for this for years. City Manager Bludau stated that staff can commit to coming back on July 11 with the results of the traffic study and the consultant's report. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that a resident contacted him expressing concern that the speed data was only taken for one period in the late morning and early afternoon, believing that speeds in the early evening and weekends will differ significantly. He indicated that he reviewed the speed data and recommends that the City obtain additional radar data during those times. Regarding Recommendation 1, Mr. Bludau reported that the Police Department has reduced the amount of enforcement for the last two months. Steve Berger, 2001 Centella, indicated that he had questions for Police Chief McDonell today but was only able to talk with Captain Henisey. He provided Council with a list of questions for Chief McDonell, Mayor Pro Tem Adams, and the City Manager and proceeded to read some of them. He stated that the six month period is over and that the residents expect a vote on this issue tonight. Noting that it took some time to get the signs up, equipment in place, and conduct a warning period, Mr. Bludau clarified that the City is five months into the six month period. Volume 53 - Page 351 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX Mayor Pro Tem Adams expressed the opinion that enforcement has resulted in a fairly dramatic drop in speeds during the times that the data was collected (10 a.m. and 1 p.m.). He reported that the average speeds are just over 30 mph (30 to 32 mph) where the average speeds used to be 35 to 36 mph. Further, he believed that there has been a dramatic drop in the number of high speed drivers which pose a safety threat. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' question, Mr. Berger indicated that he has only seen improvement during the hours of enforcement. Mr. Berger utilized photos to show that construction also brought the speeds down and took issue with the placement of the testing car, explaining that drivers will hit their brakes before their vehicle can be tested. He agreed that a 24 -hour test or a week -long test should be conducted and assured Council that the tubes would not be sabotaged. He expressed the opinion that the data provided to Council is erroneous and not reflective of week -long speeds during the enforcement period. Mayor Pro Tem Adams clarified that speed data is not collected by the road tubes but was gathered by using radar. He also explained how the radar tracks cars to its maximum speed and not just the speed at point of contact. Chris Schwartz, 2401 Santiago Drive, thanked Council and staff for pushing the program through, and the Police Department for their enforcement. He stated that he spent time with the Police Department and found it interesting to see how testing was conducted. He also expressed appreciation toward Mayor Noyes for being insistent on setting a date for when this will be brought back and Mayor Pro Tem Adams for recognizing that the times that the surveys were taken were not a good representation. He indicated that the road tubes can be placed in front of his house, if they need to be deployed again, and that he would protect it from being sabotaged. He expressed the opinion that the 3 mph decrease is not an overwhelming success and that he hopes for better. Mr. Schwartz added that he believes that speed bumps do not reduce road capacity but forces traffic to travel slower. He concluded by stating that he encourages a discussion about sidewalks as it would be a great addition to their street. Bryan Bond, 2431 Santiago Drive, stated that their desire is to return the speed limit to 25 mph, noting that the surrounding streets have 25 mph speed limits. He added that the reduced speed limit will give their neighborhood a residential feel. He believed that the 85 percentile rate needs to be reduced to whatever is enforceable for 25 mph if Police enforcement is the way they have to go. Further, that they only acquiesced to the City to raise the speed limit to 30 mph in order to conduct the traffic study. He indicated that he reviewed a seven day study from 1996 and believed that it is a more concise estimate of the traffic flow and counts. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Bond stated that they had previously sketched out sidewalks, but he does not believe in cutting back into the yards in order to install the sidewalks since the streets are wide enough to encroach into the street. Mayor Noyes reported that Mayor Pro Tem Adams will be out of town on July 11. Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to bring this Volume 53 - Page 352 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 iN17o/:1 issue back at the next meeting for a status report. In response to Council Member Debay's question about returning the speed limit back to 25 mph, Mr. Bludau reminded Council that the reason the speed limit was increased to 30 mph was not to conduct speed tests, but to conduct enforcement. Further, that the speed limit cannot be reduced if the 85 percentile is at 32 or 33 mph. Council Member Debay asked that the Costa Mesa streets be reviewed to determine how many of the streets are posted 25 mph. Mayor Pro Tem Adams pointed out that the difference between this section and other parts of Santiago Drive is that it is a designated collector street and the others are designated residential streets. He stated that he feels pretty confident that the City was able to get the speeds lower on this section than any of the other streets in the area. Mr. Bludau added that the Police Department has told him that speeding is not any worse on this street than anywhere else in town. Mayor Noyes clarified that this item will be brought back at the next meeting so that a status report can be provided on when a consultant's report and recommendation will be brought before Council, hoping that it will be brought back at the June 27 Council meeting. 16. APPOINTMENT BY MAYOR OF AD -HOC APPOINTMENTS Boards and COMMITTEE TO REVIEW APPLICATIONS AND MAKE Commissions RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FULL COUNCIL FOR THE BOARD Scheduled AND COMMISSION VACANCIES SCHEDULED TO OCCUR ON Vacancies JUNE 30, 2000 (contd. from 4/25/00). (24) Motion by Council Member Glover to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Council Member Thomson, Council Member Ridgeway, and Mayor Pro Tem Adams to serve on the Ad Hoc Appointments Committee. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 17. ORAL UPDATE ON THE GENERAL DREDGING PERMIT. Oral Report Deputy City Manager Kiff reported that he and Deputy Fire and Marine Chief Melum attended the Coastal Commission meeting in Santa Rosa earlier today. Regarding the City's general dredging permit that allows property owners along the bay to dredge their piers, he stated that they were able to get the Coastal Commission to reduce the number of corings for beach nourishment and ocean disposal, and they agreed to allow disposal of anything below 80 percent sand into the sea. Regarding eelgrass, he indicated that the Commission's regulation was unreasonable and noted that the City will be embarking on an expensive comprehensive eelgrass restoration plan throughout the bay to find places where eelgrass can grow that will not be impacted by dredging or impact the piers. Because of this, he reported that the Commission agreed to allow the City to mitigate offsite Volume 53 - Page 353 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX at those mitigation banks. He indicated that the City received a five year general dredging permit, but that South Balboa Island, South Lido Isle, Linda Isle, Rhine Channel, and Upper Newport Bay are not included in the general dredging permit. Those residents can still obtain individual permits from the Commission but cannot follow the City's permit until additional testing is conducted. He added that the Commission agreed to work with the City in developing the tests. He indicated that the City requested that individuals not be required to submit separate dredging applications to the Commission for the Executive Director's review and approval, but the Commission was not willing to negotiate that item. He reported that Commission staff promised to expedite the applications so this process does not delay dredging jobs and that the City intends to keep them to that promise. In response to Mayor Noyes' question regarding additional tests in order to place more material on the beach, Mr. Kiff believed that the testing can be done in a two to three month time period. He indicated that bids are out to companies that could conduct the testing for about $40,000 to $60,000. Council Member Debay expressed her appreciation to Mr. Kiff because he and Mr. Melum went to Santa Rosa today and was still able to attend the Council meeting to provide a report. Noting that the Commission did not provide him with the opportunity to rebut Commission staffs comments after he spoke, Council Member Debay asked if it would be beneficial to have an elected official with him if he needs to go before the Commission again. Mr. Kiff believed that the Commission would still be as dogmatic with an elected official as they were with him, but indicated that it may help. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Kiff indicated that the dredging jobs that were on hold until this matter was settled can move forward at this time, as long as the conditions set in the general permit are followed. He reported that the dredgers that normally work in the City are aware of the conditions and are ready to proceed. 18. ORAL REPORT ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE COMMITTEE. Mayor Noyes explained that Council is trying to form a General Plan Update Committee that will be chaired by Mayor Pro Tem Adams and also include Council Member Glover and Council Member Ridgeway. City Manager Bludau added that the thought behind the committee was to form a Council Ad Hoc Committee to assist Council in determining an approach for the General Plan revision. He indicated that it is suggested that the committee be composed of three Council members, three Planning Commissioners, one Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee member, one Economic Development Committee member, and one Aviation Committee member, all appointed by the Mayor. The committee would be responsible for the first phase of developing a work program for the General Plan update. He indicated that Phase I would be to design and conduct a preliminary community outreach program that would have broad participation geographically throughout the community in order to get input; solicit the cross- section of community interests and special issues through various meetings; and recommend the scale and scope of the General Plan Volume 53 - Page 354 Oral Report City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX update based on the feedback. The committee could use the information to refine their recommendation and develop a draft work program for Council to consider and identify necessary resources to accomplish the work. He stated that, if Council then determines to commence with the General Plan update, the committee can form the basis for a steering committee, bring in more stakeholders on an "as needed" basis, and provide guidance to staff and consultants on what areas of the General Plan need to be looked at for changes. Mayor Noyes requested that this item be brought back at the next meeting so that Council can form the General Plan Update Committee and he can appoint members to the committee. CURRENT BUSINESS 19. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSALS FOR FUTURE C -3316 USE/DEVELOPMENT OF MARINAPARK. Marinapark Use and Development Assistant City Manager Wood stated that, in addition to the economic (38/73) analysis, a traffic impact analysis and the types of planning entitlements that would be required for the proposals are included in the staff report. She reported that the maximum average daily trips that any of the proposals would generate are a little over 7,000 and that there would not be significant traffic impacts since a majority of the trips would not occur during the morning and evening peak hours. With the exception of proposals from the American Legion and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission (PB &R), she reported that the other proposals would require amendments to the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, as well as a Planned Community Development Plan. Additionally, the projects requiring redevelopment would also require compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Ms. Wood stated that, if Council follows the recommendation to narrow the proponent list, staff feels it would be helpful if Council also provide direction relative to the retention of public and quasi - public uses, goals for a public marina, determine the minimum ground lease if one is set, and the entitlement issue with the State Lands Commission. She clarified that the relocation impact report has been started and is expected to be completed by August. Stephen Copenhaver, GRC Associates, Inc., utilized a Power Point presentation throughout his report. He stated that the property is about 8.8 acres and that the request for proposals (RFP) included goals to seek high quality development, a secure revenue stream, development that is sensitive to the adjacent properties and government regulations, a feasible project, and a catalyst for the peninsula. He added that the RFP asked detailed questions relative to experience and financing capabilities, project description, development proforma, schedule, and consultant team; however, he believed that none of the proposals met all the requirements of the RFP. Mr. Copenhaver highlighted the eight proposals as outlined in the staff report, adding that Ficker and Stevens did not put together a real proposal; RHC Communities did not provide a proforma and an explanation of how the buildings would be funded; PB &R would probably require more than the Volume 53 - Page 355 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX proposed 2.5 acres; Terra Vista Management suggested that the City would receive five percent of the resale value of any mobile home and they would receive about six to eight percent; the American Legion can afford a much higher lease rate since it has an increasing membership, strong revenue stream, and the marina can create substantial revenue; Ayres Hotel Group values the lots on Balboa Boulevard at a much lower rate than those that have harbor views; Bendetti Company may be trying to do too much on the property and there is a concern about having retail business that is not visible from Balboa Boulevard; and Sutherland Talla Hospitality provided no real market feasibility information in the proposal. He indicated that the proposed revenues range from $1 million to more than $3 million; however, he believed that the City could not make any type of decision based on the information in the RFPs. Mr. Copenhaver reported that residential uses lend the highest land value to the area. The City would receive about $19,500 in land lease proceeds for each residential unit that is constructed on the site and $16,500 for mobile homes. However, a hotel would be the greatest revenue generator for the City because the City nets nine percent from the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). Assuming a room rate of $175 a night with 72 percent occupancy, he stated that each hotel room would generate about $4,100 a year in TOT. He added that GRC suggests that not much emphasis be placed on retail uses or office development. Mr. Copenhaver stated that GRC recommends that the City short list, but not discard proposals that restructure the leases as suggested by the American Legion and Terra Vista Management. However, the City should short list at least to the two developers that are suggesting redevelopment and provide them time to respond with a more detailed proposal. He added that narrowing the list will also give the City better proposals. He reported that many of the proposals did not discuss the topics involved with leasing property. Regarding public uses, he pointed out that many of the proposals assumed that the American Legion had to be included in either the same building or a new building, rent free. Further, the concept of a visitor marina was included in many of the plans since past studies discussed it. He believed that the City should clarify the American Legion issue and whether the City desires a visitor marina. Regarding the tidelands boundary, he reported that the City hired an engineer to study this and emphasized that the boundaries could have an immense impact on the proposals. He strongly suggested getting the results of that effort from the engineer before requesting the proponents to produce more detailed plans. He recommended that the minimum rent be $1.25 million a year, based on the range of land uses, prior studies, and developer concepts. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked how much flexibility the short listees will have to change their proposals. Mr. Copenhaver believed that the proposals should be substantially in compliance with the original proposal. He indicated that it would be difficult to keep the revenue stream calculation in substantial compliance since real proformas were not included. Noting that the State and the City have about $20 million worth of property in this site, Council Member Thomson reported that the return is only a Volume 53 - Page 356 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX little more than six percent if the minimum rent is $1.25 million a year and asked if this could be increased to ten percent. Mr. Copenhaver pointed out that the amount of developable land is reduced when public uses are included. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he lives a block from Marinapark and that the property is in his district. He indicated that he cannot agree with GRC's recommendations, reporting that the RFP was not responded to well and that he does not want to cut anyone out at this point by short listing. He noted that this will start to become very expensive for the proponents since they need to prepare a specific site plan, detailed proforma of cost and rent, and take the political environment into consideration. He indicated that he met with each of the proponents and believed that a strong direction needs to go back to them. He reported that he believes PB &R will not compete and that the American Legion probably will not compete either. He expressed the opinion that the City should have a long term income stream. Regarding the State Lands Commission, Council Member Ridgeway believed that the tidelands issue will be resolved in hopefully six months and noted that the City Attorney has been given clear direction on clarifying that matter through a court process. He concluded by stating that he believes that any proposal should include open space since many of the amenities are shared with the peninsula and that everyone is on notice that they will have to spend time, money, and effort to bring back a bankable proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he agreed with short listing after reading the report. However, if a short list does not happen, he expressed concern about the investment that all the proponents would have to make. He indicated that he would not be willing to short list the Bendetti Company since their proposal is too dense for the peninsula. Council Member O'Neil stated that everyone has their opinions about this property and how to use it. He emphasized that the City has to deal with the problem of the two existing uses on the property (American Legion and mobile home park) and noted that the American Legion remained a permitted use on all the proposals but the mobile home park was only included in some of the proposals. He believed that Council does not have a problem with giving the proponents direction on the American Legion, but the mobile home park residents will probably not voluntarily agree to abandon the site. He emphasized that appropriate uses and the tidelands/uplands issue should be resolved prior to requiring any of the proponents to conduct studies and invest the money and effort that is required to zero-in on something that Council can better evaluate. He questioned how they would be able to make a proposal without this information. He indicated that he is not in favor of eliminating anyone because it is still undecided on what can be placed on the site. Council Member O'Neil pointed out that the report indicated that none of the proposals provided a sufficient level of information to fully evaluate the project. He agreed that Council needs to provide direction and guidance to the proponents, but they are not in a position to do that now because of the tidelands issue. He reiterated that he favors not short listing the proposals or getting further information while the City is involved in developing a relocation plan in the event the mobile home park is closed and involved in Volume 53 - Page 357 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 INDEX the legal effort to define tidelands and uplands boundaries. He believed that it would not be fair or right to eliminate anybody in the interim. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he reminded all the proponents that the area is a residential neighborhood and that the project should be compatible with the neighborhood. He reported that a hotel is compatible, but a highly dense commercial project is not since the peninsula is overzoned for retail, commercial, and office. He believed that Council should look at rezoning other areas in the peninsula for more residential zoning and that a timeframe should be set to get further financial statements and more specificity to the programs so that the proponents can be eliminated as the process moves forward. Council Member Thomson believed that no possible uses should be eliminated since the City may be six months away from receiving a decision from the State Lands Commission and that another developer may come forward. He added that Council should not just narrow the list down to the individuals who responded to the RFP. In response to Council Member Debay's question, Mr. Copenhaver believed that it would be premature to have the proponents bring back a more detailed proposal when the City has not received a decision about the tidelands issue which determines what can be placed on the site. Regarding Council Member Debay's request that a traffic study be included in a future study, he noted that there are no dimension drawings. She expressed the opinion that the site is underutilized and indicated that the best use for the residential nature and for the benefit of the City would figure into any decision she makes. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to continue to consider all proposals (no short listing) and request financial statements, a specific proposal plan, and preliminary proformas on revenue to the City. Dr. Patricia Frostholm, 1805 W. Bay Avenue, provided Council with correspondence which indicates that she and her husband stand to be most affected by a change from the quiet residential area to a hotel since they live very near to the site. She reported that they currently suffer from the noise from the Best Western Hotel located at the back of them. She believes that it was a big mistake for Council to permit Best Western to add two units since they actually built five units and only created two parking spaces. She expressed the opinion that the site should be used to build a community center and public park. Noting that most people cannot afford to stay at an expensive hotel, she expressed hope that Council will utilize the site so that everyone can enjoy it and stated that their decision will affect the soul of the community forever. Regarding the American Legion, Dr. Frosthohn stated that the City let them use the land because they were grateful for the sacrifices made by these people in World War II and that the City would be very ignorant and mean to take that away from them. Val Skoro stated that he agreed with Council Member Debay's statement that the site is a jewel and believed that it should be a benefit to the entire City. He indicated that, as years have passed, views have eroded throughout Volume 53 - Page 368 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 20. INDEX the City, but that it would be beautiful if there was still an open window to view the bay and boats while driving down Balboa Boulevard. He added that he understands the need for a revenue stream, but believed that no rational decision can be made until the tidelands issue is resolved. In response to Ms. Wood's question regarding a timeframe, Council Member Ridgeway amended his motion to also direct staff to bring this back at the July 25 Council meeting. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's question, Public Works Director Webb stated that the City does not have boundary surveys but has a GIS system that includes the tract boundaries and shows a fairly good record of the dimensions of the property. City Attorney Burnham added that he does not believe that a tract map has even been filed. In response to concerns relative to the proponents spending additional funds, Council Member Ridgeway indicated that he has been involved in these types of processes and that it would be easy to spend $25,000 even though they are still in a competition. He asked if it would be appropriate to do a boundary survey, but Mr. Webb indicated that it would not do the City any good until the tideland boundaries are determined. Mr. Burnham added that the City has a report which assists them to place a line on the map that is consistent with what is believed to represent the line of mean high tide. Regarding planning purposes, Mr. Webb reiterated that the GIS mapping system will give the dimensions, plus or minus five to ten feet. Ms. Wood stated that she did not think that Council was requesting dimension drawings at this point, but just requesting financial information. Council Member Ridgeway concurred, but noted that dimension site plans are needed to do an accurate proforma so that all costs can be calculated. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: Adams Abstain: None Absent: None RENEWAL OF McFADDEN PLACE FARMERS MARKET AGREEMENT. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to approve the First Amendment to the Encroachment Agreement, which allows for annual renewal by the City Manager for up to three one -year terms and to reduce the monthly lease payment to $130 year round. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Volume 53 - Page 359 C -3098 Farmers Market Agreement (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes May 9, 2000 - None. INDEX ADJOURNMENT - at 10:00 p.m. in memory of Debbie Gray. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on May 4, 2000, at 11:30 a.m, on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 53 - Page 360