Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Minutes - 03-23-2004Agenda Item No. 1 April 13, 2004 ! CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session March 23, 2004 - 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Council Member Heffernan requested that staff present an oral report on Item 17, Financial Impact of the State Budget Proposal and Related Issues, during the evening meeting. 2. MARINER'S MILE WATERFRONT WALKWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY. Volume 56 - Page 764 INDEX (100 -2004) Director of Public Works Steve Badum introduced Randy Mason from Cash & Associates and informed the Council that he will present a PowerPoint highlights of the feasibility study for the walkway. presentation with Randy Mason, Cash & Associates Engineers, noted that his firm was hired by the City to conduct the study of Mariner's Mile. Referring to the PowerPoint presentation, he noted that the goals of the study were to come to a conclusion about the technical feasibility of providing a walkway for approximately three - quarters of a mile. He noted that from an engineering standpoint it is technically feasible. He said they wanted to define the hard and soft costs — the hard costs being construction costs and the soft costs being permits, engineering and other various costs associated with this type of project. He said they wanted to get the property owner response and noted that he met with almost every property owner, and then to come up with the various different challenges that this project would bring to the table. Referring to the Executive Summary of the costs, he pointed out that the cost is somewhere between $7 - $13 million, which does not include some of the soft costs that they were unable to get involved with since they weren't part of the scope of this project (severance damages, etc.). He noted that the various components in the walkway are pavement upgrades; building /side "yard beautification; railings and gates; land and waterside walkways; landscaping, benches, signage; pole- mounted area lighting; stairs and ramps; dock relocations; and lift bridge and equipment. He noted that there were some limitations to their work and specifically noted that they did not do any title reports. Elevation surveys along the walkway were not done, however it needs to be done in the next phase. He said they know that the Coastal Commission is in support of the general concept of the project; however his firm did not have lengthy discussions with them about the project. Referring to the slide, he showed an overall aerial photograph of the walkway. He pointed out the committed easements that are already recorded and the easements that are Volume 56 - Page 764 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 INDEX recorded. He noted that there are several optional walkway types and three are shown over the water, however for cost analysis purposes they used Type I because of the condition of the seawalls, which are owned by the property owners. The other types of walkways could be used behind the seawalls because they would be more cost effective. The Type V would be for walkways between properties leading back out to Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). Mr. Mason explained that they divided up the properties into six different zones for purposes of illustrating them. Zone 1 is Golden Shores, an office building, and the pathway currently exists there and there would not be too much work needed in that area. He noted that a stairway and a handicapped. lift would have to be relocated and a sidewalk would have to be built out over the water as you approach the Villa Nova Restaurant. He showed pictures depicting the improvements that would need to be made in Zone 1. Zone 2 includes the Villa Nova Restaurant, The Towers, and Mariners Mile commercial building. The pathway is proposed to go out over the water in front of Villa Nova, extending their gangways, etc., and suggested that they be allowed to extend their docks beyond the pierhead line. The pathway would go underneath the structure of The Towers and across the frontage of Mariners Mile. There is already an easement on the Mariners Mile property however it is compressed down 3 -1/2 feet below the top of the seawall, so they are recommending to go on the outside of it. Once the walkway is in front of Mariners Mile he said they are suggesting that the pathway be over the water and not in the existing easement since it would be too difficult to make the existing easement work from an ADA standpoint. He noted that the width is about 5 -1/2 to 6 feet. Mr. Mason explained that Zone 3 includes The Waterfront building; the Chart House, Billy's and the Rusty Pelican Restaurants; and the shipyard. He explained that the easiest walkway orientation is across the waterfront. The walkway already exists and it is in fairly good condition although some ramping will need to be done at one end. He stated that the walkways are generally sic to eight feet wide and in some cases they decrease to four feet. They could be enlarged for a price, however that is a decision Council would have to make. The walkway in front of the Chart House and Billy's are existing walkways. He pointed out that there is an existing deck at The Rusty Pelican that is at the appropriate elevation for a walking deck; however it would have to be developed. Referring to one of theA arson's office buildings right on the water, he indicated that there will need to..be a bridge to allow the launching of vessels from the boatyard. Since they launch up to eight times per day there would be times when an alternative pathway would have to be used. The support of the bridge would be on the Rusty Pelican side and it would land on a new structure at deck level for the office building. For reference purposes, he showed a picture of a conceptual hydraulic bridge that would have the guts of the bridge on the Rusty Pelican side on a large foundation, which would lower horizontally and land on the other building. Zone 4 includes the Port Calypso facility where the walkway would have to go out over the water onto the parking level. The parking spaces would have to be moved over, however none are lost. I£ the pathway stayed on land, parking would be lost. On many of the properties in this zone he said the docks which Volume 56 - Page 765 1] 0 0 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 are essentially on the pierhead line would have to be moved beyond the line by the amount that they are displaced by the new walkway. Mr. Mason noted that they have unofficially talked to the Army Corps of Engineers and there is the potential for getting approval to do that. He noted that Joe's Crab Shack is a challenge because the building is right up to the seawall so the walkway would have to go out over the water and there is the same issue with the docks needing to be moved so no rentable space would be lost. The walkway would have to go out over the water at the Josh Slocum's property and pointed out that the restaurant currently sits directly on the seawall. The Wig Shop property also has two residences on it and they are proposing to go out over the water across Josh Slocums and the Wig Shop property and push the docks out over the pierhead line. At the South Shore Yacht Club they are proposing starting out from over the water and going onto land and staying behind the bulkhead. At Pedigree Marine the proposal is to stay on land for the entire walkway, however there is a stairway that would need to be relocated and some view corridors between the buildings have to be maintained. He noted that the proposal is to keep the walkway behind the rails on land, which would definitely affect their business. When the crane is being operated pedestrians could not use the walkway and would have to be redirected to PCH and back to the water again. Zone 5 includes Windows By The Bay, Ardell and Duffy Boats. Currently Windows By the Bay has a walkway on land and they are proposing to use that. A portion of the walkway extends beneath the overhang of the existing building and is approximately 10 feet wide. The Ardell property also currently has a walkway and the proposal includes using the existing walk behind the seawall. After you get to the end of the property there is a building that extends over the bulkhead line that would have to be dealt with if the owner wanted the building to stay there and the walkway would have to go out over the water and around that building. Mr. Mason noted that the Duffy Boat property presents the biggest challenge of all the properties since their operations are so dense in the area and the frequency in which they are back and forth over the water makes it difficult to come up with a plan that doesn't affect their operations in a dramatic way. The proposal, however, does show a walkway over the water. In Zone 6, Mr. Mason noted that the Boy Scouts just reconstructed their whole complex. At the Orange Coast College Sailing base, he noted that they are proposing to use the existing walkway along the waterfront. Mr. Mason reiterated that they spoke with all the owners of the properties and many of them questioned whether the walkway would get enough use and whether it would be worth the amount of money it would cost. He noted that parking was a reoccurring issue with almost everyone and concerns were voiced about the existing restaurant parking be taken by someone coming just to use the walkway.,, He stated that there were concerns with loss of water space; however they hope to regain it by moving the pierhead line out. Another concern was the loss of landside property because of walkways on land and how that would affect business and business interruptions. View blockage was an issue with some of the restaurant owners who were worried that if people are staged on the walkway in front of tables that are on the windows that it would have a detrimental affect on their business. He noted that noise would be an issue for the residents across the channel. The maintenance of the walkway was also an issue that was raised. Mr. Mason stated that several property owners Volume 56 - Page 766 .f Mew4 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 INDEX questioned whether there would be links to other paths. He noted that those that weren't in support of the project stated that there is a very high perceived cost for the project and questioned whether it would be worth it. Just having the liability of having the public near commercial facilities, particularly the boat yards, was brought up by several of the owners. He stated that they would not want the walkway to impact any of the existing seawalls so they would not be putting any additional loads on the walls. Restroom facilities would have to be provided and the owners of the facilities did not particularly want their restrooms to be used by the public at- large. He noted that they did not look into severance damages, however that would have to be part of the next phase of the study to determine what those might be and for whom. He stated that an environmental impact study or report would undoubtedly be required for a project like this. Mayor Pro Tern Adams questioned whether the City is currently conditioning redevelopment or land use changes in this area to provide the public walkway along the water. Assistant City Manager Wood responded in the affirmative; however was unsure of the width required. Planning Director Temple indicated that the City attempts to get ten feet, however will settle for six feet. Mayor Ridgeway noted that between Coastal Commission and the City, they've been conditioning vertical and horizontal access. City Manager Bludau said that even though the proposal is not to put the walkway on top of the existing seawalls, he would be concerned about potential damage to the seawall from driving in the pilings so close to the wall. Mr. Mason explained the process that would be used to pre -drill the holes and minimize that potential. Mayor Pro Tern Adams questioned the timing with redevelopment issues and said that he feels the City should still shoot for the "ideal" through redevelopment. Mr. Mason explained his theory as to why some of the properties never built out to their legal bulkhead lines. Council Member Webb said he thinks Mr. Mason has put together the best alignment and concept that the City could hope to get however he said he agrees with Mayor Pro Tern Adams that as properties redevelop that the City needs to work with them to come up with more of a promenade effect. He noted, however, that each one will have to be looked at separately; He said that approximately one -third of the properties are older and may be redeveloped in the future. He said that perhaps the City should look at those more carefully as far as the expense of developing in front of them. He explained that this would be a long term project and the City needs to figure out and adopt some sort of plan similar to this as a master plan and works towards it. Mr. Mason clarified that when he spoke of land acquisition costs, he was really referring to easement acquisition as opposed to fee acquisition, 'As far as moving the pierhead lines, Mr. Mason explained that if the City proposes to stay within a tolerable limit within the Army Corps of Engineers threshold, then the permit cycle would be two to five years. This would mean going out no further than 20 feet from the current pierhead line. If that pierhead line were stretched out to 40 or 50 feet which would take them into the federal dredge limits, the process would take seven to ten years and would literally take an act of Congress to get it ultimately approved. He said there are various studies that would be required before any permits would be issued by the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Mason explained that the current Volume 56 - Page 767 0 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 proposal only includes extending the pierhead line to the minimum number; however the City may elect to get as much as possible in order to support the commercial businesses. He suggested that the City may want to try to go out as far as allowed to go without creating the ten year process, which he believes would be twenty feet. Mayor Ridgeway explained that a number of properties would benefit from the pierhead line move and could reconfigure their marina and dock situation and create more docks. In response to Council Member Nichols' question about the feasibility of lowering the walkway to prevent view blockage, Mr. Mason explained that you have to be at a certain elevation due to the tidal elevations and you don't want the structural components to be submerged because you would lose life of the new structures. He also noted that currently the City has a datum that no seawall can be less than nine feet high ( +9) and basically the walkway is at that same height. In response to Council Member Nichols, Mr. Mason reported that the walkway would have to go around three commercial establishments (two boatyards and Duffy's which is a combined boatyard /commercial entity), and the launching at the Scout Base would be pretty inconsequential. Mayor Ridgeway reiterated that Council does not take action at Study Sessions; however staff is looking for direction. He said he is convinced that this will be an entirely different Council by the time this comes up for some of the votes and future Councils will have to make some hard decisions. In response to Mayor Ridgeway, Mr. Mason said that he believes the next step would be the moving of the pierhead line because it has benefits to the City and the community if that can be accomplished. He noted that the cost would be between $150,000 - $500,000 depending on how far out into the water the pierhead is moved and how many studies are needed to justify it. Mr. Mason pointed out that the California Coastal Commission has two charters: 1) public access to the water's edge; and 2) environmental issues, and this accomplishes at least one of those charters. He further indicated that from past experience, the Commission wants to get people to the water and will ease off on some of the environmental requirements if they get people to the water. The environmental issues would be eelgrass, life forms that would be shaded and the mudflats that would be degraded because they're being covered. In response to Council Member Nichols, Mr. Mason reported that the walkway would be at the same level as the existing seawall. Mr. Mason noted that with the current property orientations he doesn't believe there could ever be a straight walkway and the walkway would always be following the pathway of the existing bulkheads, not necessarily the bulkhead line. It was confirmed for Council Member Nichols that the walkway would. be built at the bulkhead line, not at the pierhead line. Mr. Mason explained that the Army Corps of Engineers and the Coastal Commission would make you put the walkway closer to land and they would not want a walkway over the water just for the sake of it being over the water. In response to Council Member Rosansky, Mr. Mason reported that his report did take into consideration some soft costs — the cost of engineering, cost of permits, acquisition of land or water, however it did not include things like severance damages and he isn't sure how to put a price on that. Dave Winkler, owner of Rusty Pelican Restaurant, stated that he is not interested in creating the "e- ride" at the Rusty Pelican. He said he feels it is a very dangerous device that would be approximately 35 feet high, which would be higher than the roof on the Rusty Pelican. He said there are seismic situations Volume 56 - Page 768 INDEX City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 11701-11 and high winds to be considered. He noted that it would probably cost less to wrap around the building, exit in the parking lot and go to Larson's Shipyard. He questioned who would maintain the hydraulic bridge and who would assume the liability. He asked the Council to consider these considerations and suggested that the Council Members walk from the Arches to the Bay Club to see what is involved. He said he thinks it's a very creative idea, however from the Rusty Pelican standpoint, he is concerned that there is a walkway at the same level as the first floor dining. He said he feels this is being proposed in reverse since typically the walkway would be put in first so you could make sure the table levels are high enough to overlook the pedestrians on the walkway. He requested that the four page letter he sent to Council be made part of the record. He asked that the Council consider doing an economic report on some of the impacts to the commercial ventures along the walkway. Mr. Winkler said he would like to see the Council solve the parking problem before they move ahead and spend a lot of money on building a walkway. He said he believes they could manage this if the docks could be pushed out a little ways. . Ted Robinson, owner of Larson's Shipyard, said he likes the idea however he questioned the basic concept of the whole project since he feels it will generate more traffic. If this were to be proposed to be developed as a commercial project it would have to be "canned" because there isn't an anchor or amenities to draw in the foot traffic. He stated that the boat in the bay isn't enough to sustain businesses along a mile of walkway y. He made reference to comments in the paper about there being boutiques along the walkway, as well as restaurants, and noted that there are boutiques along the walkway in Lido Village, however there isn't enough traffic during the week to sustain them. He questioned whether people would be willing to park across the street and walk the entire length of the walkway. He .voiced concerns with the maintenance, liability and lighting. He noted that he is neutral on the project, however doesn't think it will work as a concept since it won't have the foot traffic needed to justify the money that will be spent. Council Member Heffernan spoke in opposition and noted that there has been a lot of discussion about the replacement of City Hall, which he feels will benefit everyone in the City versus a walkway even thought it is a noble idea. Until the City Hall issue is addressed thoroughly, he would question why the City would spend $100,000- $500,000 on a new study on a project like this that is much more problematic and more off in the future. He said he feels it benefits people far less than having a sizeable modern city hall facility. He said he would be against spending money unless the City is really going to take it to the next step. He said that if the City proceeds it needs to do some severance studies and see what the project will really cost. He said he is opposed to spending more money on a study unless there is a more comprehensive study dealing with all the cost structures. Mayor Pro Tem Adams said he is okay with proceeding with the moving of the pierhead lines, however he would be more interested in the ultimate plan, or vision of what it might look like 50 -100 years from now when all the properties redevelop. He agreed with Mr. Robinson based on the current development along there, however if the City diligently pursues getting 10 — 15 feet on the frontage of the properties, the whole area could transform and perhaps some day there would be an anchor that would draw in the foot traffic. He stated that Volume 56 - Page 769 L • City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 perhaps the General Plan Update should address this. He noted that this is a short -term thing that gives people access to the water and stated that the cost benefit is questionable, however if it is something that the City can afford over a reasonable amount of time, it should be pursued. Council Member Bromberg said he believes it is a beautiful project, however he isn't sure whether this is the place to do it. He stated that looking at the impacts and the cost, his sense is that it will turn into an extremely costly project. He said he hasn't seen anything to suggest that it will draw people down here to spend more time on the water, and he doesn't think it will. He doesn't believe it will make it a destination. He said he feels Mariner's Mile does need some help and he'll support anything that needs to be done to make Mariner's Mile more productive than it is now, however he isn't so sure that this is the project. Council Member Webb stated that perhaps there isn't an anchor today; however you have to look at Mariner's Mile in a manner where you can envision bringing more people in. He said perhaps some mixed uselresidential use should be considered that could create some people that would walk back and forth rather than drive back and forth. At the very least there needs to be a master plan and a direction to go before anyone comes in and redevelops that will tie into the existing facilities that are there. He said it wouldn't be a bad idea for the City to at least look at more specifically what it would take with the Corps of Engineers to have the pierhead line moved out twenty (20) feet and if it is possible for that to be a revenue source. Council Member Webb said the next step needs to be to look at the feasibility of moving the pierhead out, as well as establishing a master plan that requires future development to have a walkway across their frontage. Council Member Nichols said he thinks the long range planning should be brought back to the owners to see if it makes any sense to them. He said he really doesn't favor going further at this time with the planning. He said he doesn't see this project as a drawing card and believes it needs to be a fairly straight walkway. Council Member Rosansky said he thinks it is an interesting plan and idea; however he does think that the Council needs to look at this in the context of an overall plan for the Mariner's Mile area. He noted that there are traffic problems on Coast Highway, parking issues that need to be resolved, and he isn't sure that there is even a concrete theme for the whole area. He said he sees this as a welcome first step in trying to formulate a comprehensive plan for that area. He said he doesn't think the walkway will survive on its own and it is only one part of a very comprehensive plan. Rather than narrowing in, he said perhaps the focus should be expanded more to see how it could work with other types of improvements that could be made to Mariner's Mile. Council Member Heffernan said that probably the largest piece of land in that area is the Ardell Shipyard site, which he understands is for sale. He said this proposal may really be impacted by what happens on that property. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the comments about the sale of the Ardell property and future planning dictate that the City really should initiate moving the Volume 56 - Page 770 INDEX City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 23, 2004 pierhead line out no more than twenty (20) feet. He said he agrees with everyone who spoke in support of looking at a master plan in the area. He noted that there is a Mariner's Mile Association in District 3 and he believes they have discussed the proposal. He said he believes that concurrently some initial studies should be done. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Calkins questioned what the difference is between a current business item and a public hearing. City Attorney Burnham reported that there is not a public hearing required for decisions such as the one contemplated to take over jurisdiction of the highway. CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Burnham requested that an item be added to the Closed Session agenda which relates to the special circumstance variance that was issued for 505 J Street. The City received a call today from an attorney representing a neighbor of that property and staff has reason to believe that the issuance of that variance could lead to litigation. The attorney representing the neighbor asked if the City Council would consider entering into a tolling agreement that would stay the need to file a Writ of Mandate challenging the variance. He explained that the Council will need to make a determination that the need to take action arose after the agenda was posted and if so, to add that item to the agenda. He stated that the agenda was posted on Friday and the communication was received today. Motion by—Mayor Ridgeway to add the potential litigation item as described by the City Attorney to the Closed Session agenda. Hearing no opposition, the item was added to the agenda. ADJOURNMENT — at 6:19 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on March 17, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 56 - Page 771 INDEX • 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 - 7:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION - 6:15 p.m. INDEX xxxxxxxxx������xxxx A. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING B. ROLL CALL Present: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: None C. CLOSED SESSION REPORT - Mayor Ridgeway reported that the City Council unanimously approved a settlement in the Campbell case. The City Council also • met with, and gave direction to, its labor negotiators with respect to the Marine Safety Officers Association and the Police Employees Association. The City Council discussed the appointment of a person to fill the position of the City Attorney when the incumbent retires. Lastly, the City Council discussed anticipated litigation involving the special circumstance variance granted to the owners of 505 J Street and authorized the City Attorney to enter into a tolling agreement that would extend, for a limited period, the time within which a writ of mandate challenging that variance could be filed. D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Mayor Pro Tem Adams E. INVOCATION - Helen McFarland, Second Church of Christ Scientist F. PRESENTATIONS - Mayor Ridgeway noted the donation by Karl Malone of the Los Angeles. Lakers, and his agent, Dwight Manley, of $40,500 each for the purchase of defibrillators for the Police Department, as reported in the Grange County Register, Mayor Ridgeway additionally acknowledged Earl Fusselman, Sandy & Rob Meadows and the American Legion for their combined contribution of $10,500. <:- G. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC H. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): . Council Member Nichols requested that a follow -up to the discussion on Volume 56 - Page 772 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX group homes be brought back to the City Council. • Council Member Webb thanked "Go & Do Likewise" for their clean -up efforts at the property located at Dover Drive and Leila Lane. • Council Member Bromberg announced that a town hall meeting will be held on March 28, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. at the Balboa Island Fire Station to discuss the Marine Avenue streetscape program. • Council Member Bromberg announced that this year's Relay for Life in Newport Beach will be held on May 14 and 15, 2004. The 24 -hour fundraising event is sponsored by the American Cancer Society.,' More information can be obtained by contacting Stephanie Taylor at 949 -567- 0611. • Council Member Heffernan stated that there are still gaps in the cell phone system within the city and requested a report on the results of the cell site ordinance that was adopted by the City Council last year. He specifically requested that the report include information on how many companies have applied for cell site permits and how many times the City is expected to be a landlord. • Mayor Ridgeway announced that the Friends of the Library are in need of books for their book store at the Central Library. For more information, contact the Friends of the Library at 949 - 759 -9667. I. CONSENT CALENDAR ., READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 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 3. RESOLUTION:. TO EXPAND THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE CITY (100 -2004) CENTENNIAL 2006 COMMITTEE. Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -24 expanding the membership of the Centennial Committee to include the Directors; of the Recreation & Senior Services Department and the Library Services Department; a member from the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce; the Newport Beach Conference & Visitors Bureau; the Nautical Museum; and seven citizens. 4. TERMINATION OF NON - EXCLUSIVE COMMERCIAL SOLID Solid Waste WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -25 Franchise terminating the solid waste franchise agreement between the City of Agreement Newport Beach and C &N Waste Services. (42/100 -2004) Volume 56 - Page 773 9 0 • 0 0 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 5. NEWPORT SHORES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION — C- 3669(A) APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. Newport Shores 1) Approve a Landscape Maintenance Agreement with the Newport Landscape Shores Homeowners Association for public and private improvements; Maintenance 2) authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement; and Agreement 3) authorize the City Clerk to record the Agreement with the County (38/100 -2004) Recorder. 6. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Council Member Nichols. 7. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Council Member. Nichols. 8. IRVINE AVENUE 12 -INCH WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT, C -3450 SHERINGTON PLACE TO DOVER DRIVE — COMPLETION AND Irvine Avenue ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT (C- 3450). 1) Accept the work; 12 -Inch 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; 3) authorize the Water Main City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Replacement Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable (38/100 -2004) portions of the Civil Code; and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond one (1) year after Council Acceptance. 9. SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM C -3629 (FY2003 -2004) — COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE OF Sidewalk, Curb CONTRACT (C- 3629). 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk & Gutter to file a Notice of Completion; 3) authorize the City Clerk to release the Replacement Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion has Program been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; (38/100 -2004) and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond one (1) year after Council Acceptance. 10. BALBOA ; ISLAND "BAYFRONT REPAIRS FY2002 -2003 — C -3554 COMPLETION AND. 'ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT (C- 3554). Balboa Island 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Bayfront Repairs Completion; 3)authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and (38/100 -2004) Materials bondr35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond one (1) year after Council Acceptance. 11. BALBOA BOULEVARD CATCH BASIN FILTERS — COMPLETION C -3670 AND ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT (C- 3670). 1) Accept the work; Balboa and 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion. Boulevard Catch Basin Filters (38/100 -2004) 12. MARINERS VILLAGE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS — C -3612 COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT (C- 3612). J Mariners Village Volume 56 - Page 774 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 1) Accept the work; 2) authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; 3) authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; and 4) release the Faithful Performance Bond one (1) year after Council Acceptance. 13. NEWPORT BOULEVARD FROM 26TH STREET NORTHERLY — AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3649). 1) Approve the.. plans ..and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3649) to Griffith Company for the total bid price of $160,950 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; 3) establish an amount of $16,000 to coverGthe cost of unforeseen work; and 4) approve geotechnical services in the amount of $5,000. E 14. NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND BALBOA BOULEVARD MERGER (MLYMASTER) — AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3654). 1) Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3654) to GMC Engineering, Inc. for the total bid price of $282,887.25 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; 3) establish an amount of $28,000 to cover the cost of unforeseen work; and 4) approve geotechnical and survey work in the amount of $4,700. 15. OCEANFRONT WALKWAYS (MCFADDEN SQUARE) - AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3660). 1) Approve the plans and specifications; 2) award the contract (C -3660) to Trademark Concrete Systems, Inc. for the total bid price of $104,331, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; and 3) establish an 'amount of $10,000 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. 16. APPROVAL OF TWO CONTRACTS FOR THE INTEGRATED LAW AND JUSTICE PROJECT. 1) Approve a contract with Computer Deductions, Inc. (CDI) in the amount of $107,783.50 from Account #7017 - C1820747 to improve network configurations and security requirements for nine municipal police departments as approved by the Steering Committee for the Integrated Law and Justice Project in Orange County; and 2) approve a contract with Deloitte Consulting in the amount of $220,000 from' Account' #7017 -C1820746 to facilitate the design and implementation of a pilot project involving data sharing between records management systems (RMS) in the criminal justice agencies in the County of Orange, as approved by the Steering Committee of the Integrated Law and Justice Project in August of 2002. s_ MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 1' 17. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Council Member Heffernan. 18. BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ACCEPT A CHECK FROM THE NEWPORT BEACH LIBRARY FOUNDATION AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS TO MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS BUDGET ACCOUNTS AND REVENUE ACCOUNTS FOR FY Volume 56 - Page 775 INDEX Landscape Improvements (38/100 -2004) C -3649 Newport Boulevard from 26th Street Northerly (38/100 -2004) C -3654 Newport Blvd. and Balboa Blvd. Merger (Mixmaster) (38/100 -2004) C -3660 Oceanfront Walkways (McFadden Square) (38/100 -2004) C- 3692(A) C- 3692(B) Integrated Law and Justice Project (38/100 -1004) (100 -2004) 0 • City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX • 2003/04. Approve a budget amendment (04BA -041) in the amount of $9,350. 19. BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ACCEPT A CHECK FROM (100 -2004) CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS TO MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. Approve a budget amendment (04BA -042) in the amount of $10,643. 20. PURCHASE OF THERMAL IMAGING CAMERAS. Waive bidding process requirement and approve the purchase of three ISG K -1000 Hi- Resolution Micro - Bolometer Thermal Imaging Cameras for $41,086.13 from Allstar Fire Equipment with grant funds. 21. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Council Member Nichols. 22. RELEASE OF SURETY FOR CONCRETE ALLEY EXTENSION STRUCTURE ADJACENT TO 405 GOLDENROD AVENUE — ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. N2001 -0110. 1) Accept the concrete alley extension work in conjunction with Encroachment Permit No. N2001 -0110; and 2) authorize the City Clerk to release the $8,000 refundable faithful performance surety retained by the City as a guarantee for completing the remaining alley extension work. 531. APPOINTMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AFFAIRS CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Confirm Council Member Rosansky's appointment of Merritt Van Sant as the District 2 at -large representative to the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC). Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adams to approve the Consent Calendar, except for the items removed (1, 6, 7, 17 and 21). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 17. FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE STATE BUDGET PROPOSAL AND RELATED ISSUES. [Taken out of order). Mayor Ridgeway received no objection to taking Item No. 17 out of order City Manager Bludau stated that the staff report includes a list of revenue sources that the City used to receive from the State, but no longer does. He stated that these have been lost over a period of time, with the most significant being the shift in property taxes from local government to schools in 1992 -1993. He stated that the loss to Newport Volume 56 - Page 776 (100 -2004) (100 -2004) (100 -2004) (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 Beach totals $56 million over the last fifteen years. In addition to the loss in revenue, the City is also facing an increase in pension costs. City Manager Bludau listed the assumptions that he and the Administrative Services Director made when preparing the preliminary budget for 2004- 2005. The initial budget estimates indicated an operating deficit of approximately $1.5 million, but the deficit has been reduced to approximately $100,000 by knowing better what the current revenues are and making adjustments to the 2004 -2005 revenue estimates.'iIie stated that the departments have also cooperated. City Manager Bludau reported that there are still some concerns, but that Newport Beach is in better shape than many other cities and the City Coundil,has done a good job of being fiscally conservative and responsible. 'He stated that.the tradeoff of sales tax, to be used for State bond funding, for property tax is being called the "triple flip" by the State and that cities have no control over it. He stated that it will take effect July 1, 2004, and is supposed to have no impact since the amount taken in sales tax would be equal to the amount returned in property tax. Mayor Ridgeway confirmed with City Manager Bludau that the State will force the "triple flip" legislation on cities as a way to take care of their bond financing. Mayor Ridgeway stated that at a recent Mayor's luncheon, no one was in support of the legislation. Council Member Heffernan thanked the City Manager for the report and noted the importance of keeping the public informed.' City Manager Bludau stated that the public needs to understand that when they read about the State taking money from local government, it's money that's being taken from the residents. Mayor Ridgeway stated that it's a difficult time for most cities and Newport Beach is fortunate to have a status quo budget. Dolores Otting asked what amount the City will be paying for the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) this year. City Manager Bludau stated that he would provide Ms. Otting with the amount. Jim Hildreth stated that'salary increases were recently given to the City Clerk, City Manager and City Attorney. He stated that he sees a lot of waste in the City and that the citizens shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of impropriety of funds. He stated that the purse strings should be tightened. J. PUBLIC HEARINGS 23. BALBOA VILLAGE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT RENEWAL: CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR RENEWAL OF THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2004 -2005. Senior Planner Campbell stated that no protests for the Business Improvement District (BID) were received. The budget for the BID is Volume 56 - Page 777 INDEX (100 -2004) 0 E City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 approximately $25,000 per year and the money is used for marketing, events and minor physical improvements. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, Mayor Ridgeway closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to adopt Resolution No. 2004 -26 confirming the levy of the BID assessment for the 2004 fiscal year. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 24. CALL FOR REVIEW OF USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -043 AND TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 2004 -001, APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 4, 2004 — 494/496 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD (PA2003 -232): Associate Planner Ramirez stated that the Planning Commission determined the findings that could be made for the project to exceed the 0.5 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and decided to go with a 1:250 parking ratio for the medical office building development. The Planning Commission further determined that granting an off - street parking credit for two of the on- street spaces was allowed under the provisions of the Old Newport Specific Plan and was acceptable. Associate Planner Ramirez reported that this resulted in a total.of 47 parking spaces and using the 1:250 parking ratio, it was determined that a gross floor area of 11,750 square feet was appropriate for the development. Mayor Ridgeway recalled that the Planning Commission, in the past, has encouraged redevelopment in the Old Newport Boulevard area. He felt that the current project fit within that goal. Associate Planner Ramirez agreed and stated that the Specific Plan allows the Planning Director to grant a FAR 'above the standard 0.5, up to 0.75 at the director's discretion. Steve Olson, an owner of the proposed project and speaking on behalf of James Mathersroud and Robert Lawrence, stated that the Planning Commission approved a reasonable compromise to their original submittal. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Olson explained that the Old Newport Specific Plan encourages the lot consolidation of existing parcels and that the proposed project does this. He stated that the proponents of the project also want the City Council to consider a street vacation along Orange Avenue, which would create a project site of 18,418 square feet. Mr. Olson displayed photos of the current site and Volume 56 - Page 778 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX use. He stated that the City Council is being asked to approve an 11,750 - square foot medical/professional office building at a 0.63 FAR, and that the vacation will allow for additional landscaping in the area of the site and improvements to the neighboring residential areas. He specifically explained that the project would include the replacement of the sidewalk, curb and gutter on Orange Avenue from the corner of Old Newport Boulevard to Clay Street. Mr. Olson continued to display photos and illustrations of the area and site, and stated that the traffic study and the parking study both found no significant adverse or negative impacts`to the area. He detailed other aspects of the project that take the ncighbors concerns into consideration. Council Member Nichols confirmed with Mayor Ridgeway that the vacation is on one side of the street only. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. Jim Hildreth stated that he hates to see the muffler shop go, which is currently on the site. He also felt that there isn't much traffic in the area, but that visibility is poor as one travels south on Old Newport Boulevard. Ryan Dodd stated that the redevelopment of the Old Newport Boulevard area is long overdue and much needed. He stated that the area needs to be cleaned up. Stacy Wise distributed photos of the area. She stated that she is concerned about the off - street parking in the area, and noted that there is already an overflow of parking on the streets and into the surrounding residential areas. She stated that the intention of the Specific Plan was to bring a village atmosphere to the area, but that the medical buildings have changed the theme dramatically. She further noted that the City is also considering using Old Newport Boulevard to divert traffic from the Newport Heights residential area. Ms. Wise stated that she doesn't oppose the project, as a whole, but feels that the different usage of medical buildings should be taken into consideration. John Ogburn "stated that limited parking is a way of life in Newport Beach and street parking is part of the quaint nature of the city. He stated that redevelopment should be done where it can and that he supports the project. Mark Manderson stated that the project proponents have fully cooperated with the neighbors, and that the enhancements to the intersection, curbs, gutters and sidewalk will improve safety in the area. He expressed his support for the project and stated that a medical building is needed in the area. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Ridgeway closed the public hearing. Council Member Rosansky stated that he called the matter up for review. Volume 56 - Page 779 0 • City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX He agreed with the intent of the Specific Plan to encourage redevelopment in the area and expressed his support for the project. He stated that the Specific Plan includes provisions for the City to grant "bonuses" for those projects that consolidate lots or improve the area. Council Member Rosansky noted that the standard 0.5 FAR would allow for 9,000 square feet to be built at the proposed site. He stated that the 11,750 square feet that was approved by the Planning Commission was one of the bonuses that was given to the project proponents. In addition, other bonuses include the approval to exceed the bulk size requirements and the vacation of a portion of the street that the City owns.. Council Member Rosansky noted that there are traffic and parking problems in the area, and that the parking requirements for medicalldental buildings are currently being studied by the City. He disagreed with allowing two on- street parking spaces to count towards the parking requirements for the proposed project. He stated that the City has met its obligation to encourage and assist the redevelopment and has already provided several bonuses to the project proponents, but that the two on- street parking spaces should not be counted and only 11,250 square feet should be allowed. Council Member Webb also agreed that the two on- street parking spaces should not count towards the project's parking requirements and that there is already an overflow of parking in the area. He specifically noted . that one of the spaces may not be feasible anyway, due to a large catch basin that is in the way. Council Member Webb further suggested that a condition be added that requires the employees to park on site, and asked if another condition should be added regarding the improvements that were mentioned for Orange Avenue. Public Works Director Badum stated that it could be added, but that it is the intent of the applicants. Council Member Webb felt that it should be added, and explained that Orange Avenue is an entrance into a residential area. He stated that it's important that the project include a minimum five -foot landscaping strip, which would lead into a larger landscaped area on the property next to Clay Avenue. He stated that he will be making a recommendation to modify the setbacks and require that 50% of the setback be used for landscaping for approval.of the vacation, which is to be discussed during the next item on the agenda at the current meeting, Item INTO. 25. Council Member: Heffernan stated that he still believes that when a matter is called up for review that the reason for the appeal be given. He stated that this allows staff and the applicant to work together on the issues. prior to the City Council meeting. He stated that it's fairer to the applicant and a more effective use of time. Council Member Rosansky stated that he and Council Member Webb both met with the applicant and the architect, and expressed their objections to the project prior to the current meeting. Council Member Nichols stated that he also met with the project . proponents, and felt that the setback and the parking requirements were appropriate for the project. He expressed his support for the project. Volume 56 - Page 780 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 Council Member Bromberg stated that there is a shortage of medical offices in the City and that there isn't a lot of available space. He felt that the project would be good for the Old Newport area. He expressed his support for the project and noted that the Planning Commission approved the project by a vote of 6 -1. Motion by Council Member Rosansky to modify the decision of the Planning Commission by limiting the project to 11,250 square feet, giving no credit for the two on- street parking spaces, and adding two conditions to the use permit, which include that all employees are required to park on site and that the curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements to Orange Avenue will be made. Substitute motion by Mayor Ridgeway to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the Planning Commission does a good job, and that the applicant has met the requirements of the City and the Old Newport Specific Plan. He stated that the uphill grade into the residential area sets it apart from the commercial area. Council Member Webb asked 'how the approved square footage for the project would be handled if it is determined that the two on- street parking spaces aren't feasible. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he is relying on what has been provided in the staff report and noted that he has seen other parking spaces in front of catch basins in the city. The substitute motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, Bromberg, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: Rosanksy, Adams, Webb Abstain:, None 1. Absent: Noise 25. VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF ORANGE AVENUE, LOCATED IN THE NEWPORT HEIGHTS AREA. Public Works Director Badum stated that the description and the map need to be modified slightly to accommodate larger curb returns. He explained that it was noticed earlier in the day that the way the vacation was laid out, it might preclude the larger curb returns that are required by the City's design standards. Mayor Ridgeway asked if the applicant was advised of the modifications. Public Works Director Badum stated that it will not affect the project; it will only change a couple of bearings and the curb radius. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. Volume 56 - Page 781 INDEX (100 -2004) 0 0 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Hearing no testimony, Mayor Ridgeway closed the public hearing. Mayor Ridgeway asked how the modifications should be expressed in the motion. Public Works Director Badum stated that the current plan shows a 15 -foot radius curb return at Clay Street and Orange Avenue, and a 25 -foot return at Orange Avenue and Old Newport Boulevard. He stated that staff desires to have concentric right -of -way so that the sidewalk width can be preserved. He stated that the radius should be changed to a 45- degree angle cut. Motion by Mayor Ridaewav to a) adopt Resolution No. 2004 -27 ordering the vacation and abandonment of a portion of Orange Avenue, with the changes articulated by the Public Works Director; and b) direct the City Clerk to have the resolution recorded by the Orange County Recorder. Council Member Webb stated that the vacation will allow a commercial building setback to go to zero on Orange Avenue. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the setback for the project has already been established and approved. Council Member Webb stated that the residential parcel between the project and Clay Avenue has not been approved. He suggested that a building setback of at least ten feet be established for the parcel. He explained that this will disallow a building to be built into the area that is being vacated. ' Mayor Ridgeway confirmed with the City Attorney that this change could not be made at the current meeting since it was not agendized. Council Member Webb asked if it would be possible to delay the recordation of the vacation until the zoning could be reviewed. City Attorney Burnham stated _that the City Council can condition the resolution of vacation to be effective upon the happening of a subsequent event. In response to Council Member Heffernan's question, City Attorney Burnham stated that the right -of -way becomes available when the resolution is recorded, but he didn't know what affect this would have on the developer. Council Member Webb stated that there are two parcels involved and suggested that the vacations be recorded separately. City Attorney Burnham confirmed that Council Member Webb wants the resolution on the residential parcel to be contingent on the approval of a setback change. to Council Member Heffernan confirmed with the City Attorney that the vacation on the street in front of the proposed project will occur now and Volume 56 - Page 782 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX the vacation on the residential parcel will occur later. Amended motion by Mavor Ridgeway to a) adopt Resolution No. 2004 -27 ordering the vacation and abandonment of a portion of Orange Avenue, with the changes articulated by the Public Works Director; and b) direct the City Clerk to have the revised resolution recorded by the Orange County Recorder. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Mchols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None K. PUBLIC COMMENTS • Robert Walchli corrected a typo made in his editorial in the March 23, 2004, edition of the Daily Plot by stating that he was expressing his concern about the number of beach bars on the peninsula. Additionally, Mr. Walchli noted the doubling of the parking rates at State parks and stated that it will force more people and traffic onto the streets in Corona del Mar. He asked the City to protect the quality of life of the residents and provide Corona del Mar with substantial traffic relief during the summer. Mr. Walchli stated that better enforcement of the 10:00 p.m. beach closure'is also needed. Lastly, Mr. Walchli asked when the public parking on Coast Highway by the Balboa Bay Club would be reestablished. • David Pillman, Pillman Architects and Go Access, stated that the purpose of Go Access is to remove. architectural and communication access barriers for the disabled. He stated that he wants to create a foundation that will allow him to. be an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) <; ombudsman, and someone,.who will be recognized in the field and whose opinion will 'mean something: He stated that he has ways to get money into the community so that the City can do the work it wants to do. Mr. Pillman asked for the City's help during the tough times he is having. He provided int ation on Pillman Architects. • Jim Hildreth stated that he still has time to file his lawsuit and will present it to the City Clerk's office tomorrow. He stated that the information about him on the City's website is incorrect. r:.. L. ORAL REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Status report — Ad Hoc General Plan Update Committee (GPUC). Mayor Pro Tem Adams reported that GPUC and the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) met on March 22, 2004. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that both committees reviewed the technical background report for the general plan update. Additionally, GPAC discussed the planning issues for the update. The Volume 56 - Page 783 0 0 • City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 item will be agendized for the City Council meeting on April 13, 2004, as a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. Status report - Local Coastal Program (LCP) Certification Committee. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he was happy to report that many comments are being received about the local coastal plan. The Planning Commission will have the item agendized again at their meeting on April 22, 2004. Planning Director Temple stated that the Planning Commission has requested that, if possible, written comments be submitted to the City by April 14th, so that staff can respond and include the information in their staff report. Status report - Newport Coast Advisory Committee (NCAC). Council Member Heffernan reported that the NCAC will hold its next meeting on April 5, 2004, to discuss the details of the siting and layout for the Newport Coast Community Center. Status report - Telecommunications Committee. Council Member Heffernan reported that the committee has met and discussed the complicated right -of -way ordinance. Their next meeting will be held on April 19, 2004. Status report - Mariners Joint Use Library Ad Hoc Steering Committee. Council Member Webb announced that the committee's next meeting will be held on April 14, 2004, at 3:30 p.m. to discuss final cost estimates and prepare to go out to bid. He stated that a groundbreaking ceremony is being planned for June 2004. Status report - City Centennial 2006 Committee. Council Member Webb announced that seven community members are being sought to serve on the committee. He stated that anyone that is interested should submit an application to the City Clerk's office by April 1, 2004. Status report - Aviation Committee. Council Member Bromberg stated that the committee doesn't have any new issues to report on, but should have something within the next sixty days. Status report - San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Joint Powers Agency Board of Directors. 'Mayor Pro Tem Adams reported that the San Joaquin Hills corridor is not meeting its projections in tolls and retirement of debt, and is forecasted.to go into technical default in a couple of years. In an attempt to address the situation, the San Joaquin Hills board and the Foothill Eastern board formed a provisional agency, the Transportation Corridor Systems, to investigate consolidating the two agencies. Both boards have voted to proceed with the consolidation. A final vote will be taken by the Transportation Corridor Systems board on April 8, 2004. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that it's important that the consolidation be approved. M. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AND ORAL STATUS REPORT 26. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR MARCH 18, 2004. Planning Director Temple stated that the first item on the Planning Volume 56 - Page 784 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 N Commission agenda was the consideration of an amendment to the use permit for Zinc Cafe. She stated that the applicant requested two changes to their use permit, which included the sale and service of beer and wine, and the extension of their food service hours from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 P.M. Planning Director Temple stated that the Planning Commission based their original approval of the use permit on the limited hours of operation and did not feel that 10:00 p.m. was appropriate given the limited availability of public parking in the area. They did, however, approve an extension of the hours to 8:30 p.m. The, second item on the agenda was a review of the local coastal plan, which will be continued at the Planning Commission meeting on April 22, 2004. She stated that there was extensive public testimony. Per Council Member Heffernan's question, Planning Director Temple stated that the two dissenting votes on the Planning Commission for the Zinc Cafe item were Commissioners Toerge and McDaniel. Council Member Nichols requested that the Zinc Cafe item be called up for review. Additionally, he stated that he wants to call up some items from the Modifications Committee meeting. City Attorney Burnham stated that the matter is not agendized for the currentmeeting, but that Modifications Committee call-ups can be done directly by a council member with the Planning Director anyway. 1. CONTINUED BUSINESS 27. AMENDMENTS TO THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRING USE OF FRANCHISED SOLID WASTE HAULERS FOR DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES. Motion by Council Member Webb to adopt Ordinance No. 2004 -2 amending Section 15.02.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to the Uniform Administrative Code to clarify procedures and requirements or handling solid waste from demolition activities. Jim Hildreth'stated that be was not allowed to speak on this item at a previous City Council meeting He stated that if Shellmaker is worried about recycling, they should check with the Edison Company, since they must also do similar disposals during utility undergrounding projects. Mr. Hildreth stated that Shellmaker provides a benefit to the City and possibly there eould be a joint venture on waste disposal. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: r Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 28. MEASURE S GUIDELINES PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. Volume 56 - Page 785 INDEX 0 Franchised Solid Waste Haulers for Demolition Activities (421100 -2004) (100 -2004) 0 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 City Attorney Burnham stated that it's been approximately three years since the Measure S guidelines were adopted and that, since that time, there has been some experience in applying the guidelines to real projects. He stated that six topics are currently being recommended for amendment, with the first being a minor modification in the language that empowers the City Council to deviate from a strict application of the guidelines when necessary to stay consistent with the purpose of Measure S. City Attorney Burnham stated that it is recommended that the word "deviation" be changed to "departure ". In response to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' question, City Attorney Burnham clarified that he is recommending that the City Council adopt Exhibit A -1 in the staff report to make this change. City Attorney Burnham stated that Exhibit B eliminates extraneous language in the definition of the term "allowed uses ". Exhibit C outlines a proposal to define the word "approval ". He explained that it clarifies what it means under Measure S for the City Council to approve an amendment that requires voter approval. City Attorney Burnham stated that he feels that the City Council's decision to approve an amendment only moves the amendment along to the voters and, additionally, that the City Council has the option of either approving the amendment or approving it for the purpose of submitting it to the voters. He noted that in Webb Exhibit C, language is added to insure that appropriate action is taken to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Webb Exhibit C also includes language that confirms that the City Council retains the authority to disapprove an amendment, which would not require that it move to the voters. Council Member Heffernan read from the text of Measure S and stated that the recommended definition of the word "approval" differs from the what is required by the measure. City Attorney Burnham agreed that having the City Council approve an amendment after the voters have approved it is cumbersome, but it was a request made by Council Member Webb and he feels that it`conforms with the intent, and is consistent with the text, of Measure S.. Council Member Heffernan stated that he feels that the amendment should be fully addressed and voted on prior to it going to the oters. City Attorney Burnham explained that there wouldn't be any change in the procedure leading up to the actual motion made by the City Council. It would remain the same whether the amendment requires voter approval or not. The only difference is the actual motion that is made after, or in conjunction with, the certification of the environmental document. After a brief discussion, Mayor Ridgeway clarified that staffs Exhibit C is more consistent with the intent of Measure S. City Attorney Burnham agreed, but added that the language regarding CEQA and the City Council retaining the authority to deny an amendment should also be included. He noted that this is also consistent with requests made by the Greenlight Steering Committee. Volume 56 - Page 786 INDEX City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Council Member Rosansky agreed that staffs Exhibit C would be more appropriate, but suggested that the second sentence be removed. He explained that this is unnecessary language. Council Member Webb stated that with Webb Exhibit C, he was attempting to address situations when the City Council might want the voters to approve an amendment prior to it being approved;by the .City Council. He explained that all of the information necessary to make' a decision on an amendment would still be discussed prior to it going to the voters. The vote by the City Council after an approval by-'the voters would be automatic after the vote is certified. Mayor Ridgeway stated that it would be too confusing. City Attorney Burnham felt that Council Member Webb was trying to address the concept that the City Council's approval of an amendment is only approving it to go to the voters anyway and there might be situations when the City Council would prefer not to vote on the amendment prior to it going to the voters. He agreed that it does potentially present some practical and legal problems. City Manager Bludau stated that an example of when an amendment might go to the voters first might be one where the City Council is fairly evenly divided on their opinion of an amendment and the decision is made to let the voters decide. Council Member Bromberg stated that staffs Exhibit C inconsistent with the intent of Measure S, and felt that the second sentence should remain. He added that he'd have no problem with the third sentence being removed. He explained that the guidelines need to be clear for future staff and council members. City Attorney Burnham reminded the council members that six affirmative votes are required to amend the Measure S guidelines. City Attorney Burnham stated that staff is recommending the changes outlined in Rosansky Exhibit D, and explained that this deletes unnecessary, text frorrkthe. non- residential use category. Staff is also recommending Rosansky.,Exhibit E, which more clearly states that non- residential entitlements would be stated in both terms of floor area and the appropriate unit" of measurement used in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual to determine peak hour trips. Mayor, Pro Tern Adams asked why the ITE manual is being referred to and not the trip table that's in the document. He explained that it's confusing to refer to a primary unit of measurement in the ITE manual, when if hasn't been clearly defined. He stated that the table takes out the decision making for what independent variable is used. Mayor Pro Tern Adams further suggested that with all of the changes to the proposed guidelines being discussed at the current meeting, it might be advantageous to have a clean version of the guidelines presented to the City Council at a future meeting for adoption. He stated that this would allow time to understand the long -term impacts of the changes being proposed. Volume 56 - Page 787 0 0 L City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 Council Member Webb asked how a hotel would be analyzed when both extra square footage and number of rooms are being considered for trip generation. City Attorney Burnham stated that the amendment would have to be phrased in terms of the additional floor area being proposed and the unit of measurement from the trip table. He stated that it creates a problem because the general plan doesn't have square -foot entitlements for hotels. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that if his suggestion to present the revised guidelines to the City Council for action at a future meeting is approved, he would also like a couple scenarios included in the report that would show how the guidelines would actually be implemented. Council Member Heffernan suggested that it include clear mathematical examples to show how they would or wouldn't apply.'. . Mayor Ridgeway agreed that some type of analysis would be important, but the traffic analysis is what matters. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the current general plan provides entitlement in terms of rooms, and that he still can't understand how a decision can be based on square footage. He explained that it seems artificial and asked if the guidelines would need to include an assignment of square footage per room. City Attorney Burnham agreed that it is currently missing. City Attorney Burnham stated that the second part of Exhibit E attempts to confirm that an amendment that requires voter approval will be treated the same as one that does not require voter approval, in terms of the analysis, the evaluation and the consideration. Exhibit F attempts to streamline some procedures and to have all of the information that the City Council and the Planning Commission need to determine whether an amendment requires voter approval is in the staff reports when the action is taken on the'amendment. Phil Arst, spokesperson for Greenlight, provided a handout, and stated that he supports the suggestions made by Council Member Rosansky and agrees with the comments made by Council Member Heffernan regarding the approval process. He explained that the City Charter states that matters are to be submitted to the voters only after approval by the City Council. He stated that this is the foundation of the intent of Measure S and requires the City Council to thoroughly review a project prior to submitting it to the voters. Mayor Ridgeway clarified that the City Council is only submitting the amendment to the voters, not the project. Mr. Arst stated that the voters still need all of the information about the project in order to cast their vote. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if both of the tables in the handout from Volume 56 -Page 788 INDEX City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Mr. Arst are to be used. Mr. Arst stated that only the first table needs to be looked at, unless the suggestions made by Council Member Rosansky aren't considered. In addition to the disagreement over the definition of the approval process, he also stated that Greenlight disagrees with the definition of "entitlement ", since it can be construed to mean that entitlements can be based on hotel rooms. He explained that Measure S is only triggering a vote of the people, and does not reject a project. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that Measure S could, in effect, reject a. project because a project might never be brought to the City! , He further noted that the general plan does not provide a square footage per hotel room measure. Mr. Arst stated that in the majority of cases, estimated square footage of existing hotels is included in the general plan. Mayor Ridgeway noted the project at the Dunes Resort that was proposed a couple of years ago and stated that it was an anomaly. He explained that it had an underlying development agreement that allowed the proposed project without it going to the voters. Mayor Ridgeway stated that Mr. Arst is attempting to address that anomaly with his suggestions. Mr. Arst stated that he feels that it could happen again and is a problem. Council Member Bromberg confirmed with Mr. Arst that_he prefers to use square footage as a measure for hotels because traffic might be generated by other means than just hotel rooms, such as a convention center. He asked Mr. Arst if he would support a change to the guidelines to address this, by not using.the square footage measure i£ there isn't any other means for bringing people in. Mr. Arst stated that neither he or the City Council has the authority to depart from the law and the law states that intensity shall be considered. Council Member Bromberg stated that laws are subject to interpretation and the Measure S guidelines are the method being used to provide that interpretation. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that there appears to be consensus on Rosansky Exhibit E and that the scenarios that will be provided when the guidelines come back -..to: the City Council for adoption will be helpful. Mr. Arst `stated that Gresnlight agrees with Council Member Rosansky's interpretation of floor area, but that it is based on changing the definition of entitlement. ,Additionally, he referred to John Buttolph's letter of March 22, 2004,:' and stated that it has the wording for the approval process that Greenlight would agree with. Mr. Arst stated that Mr. Buttolph.is an attorney and his wording is in strict conformance with the City Charter. City Attorney Burnham stated the text in the general plan doesn't provide a strict floor area limit and asked how the trigger can be-'calculated. Mr. Arst stated that the general plan does have a consistent methodology of estimating hotel rooms at 1,000 square feet per room. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that it might be unfair to some hotels, such as luxury hotels which might have more square footage per hotel room without creating any detrimental impacts. He felt that there needs to be equity in the way the trigger for a vote is applied, and that it should be Volume 56 - Page 789 9 10 • City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX fair and well defined. City Attorney Burnham agreed that there needs to be a factual basis for making the determination that the amendment proposes an increase of more than 40,000 square feet. The statistical tables in the general plan only provide an estimate. Mr. Arst stated that the wording in the measure is clear. Mayor Pro Tem Adams clarified that the issue is not about the use of intensity for hotels, it's about how to handle hotels that don't have square footage identified. Mayor Ridgeway suggested that City Attorney Burnham and Mr. Buttolph discuss the issue. Council Member Nichols stated that the actual square footage for the rooms could be used. Mayor Pro Tem Adams clarified that it's an entitlement issue, and that an existing hotel might not be using its full entitlement. Even applying the actual room to square foot ratio might not be reasonable. City Attorney Burnham added that in some instances, it has been found that a larger hotel room has less usage, a lower occupancy rate and a lower peak hour trip rate. Mr. Arst suggested that when a hotel's square footage can't be calculated from the table, an actual measurement could be taken. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the point is that what they've built doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what they're entitled to build. City Attorney Burnham stated that he will work on the issue when . preparing the revised guidelines. Mayor Ridgeway thanked Mr. Arst for his comments. Mr. Arst stated that progress has been made and he looks forward to continuing to work with the City. He noted, however, that time is of the essence. Jim Hildreth stated that it might behoove hotels not to have the change adopted, since the City is charging per square footage. He felt that the clarifications to the guidelines are actually becoming a change to the ordinance. He stated that the general public would like to vote on this matter and all matters that have to do with density. He also felt that the City should determine how it will inform the voters as to what is going on. He stated that when people are close together and a hotel creates more density, it q presents a problem. Motion by M Vor Pro Tem Adams to continue the item to April 27, 2004. Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that the revised guidelines be provided to the City Council and Greenlight as soon as possible, so that a thorough review can take place prior to the meeting. Mayor Ridgeway offered the availability of the council members to Mr. Arst to assist in moving the matter forward. 0 The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Volume 56 - Page 790 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Mayor Ridgeway recessed the meeting at 10:00 p.m. and reconvened.the meeting at 10:10 p.m. with all council members present. O. CURRENT BUSINESS 29. RELINQUISHMENT OF COAST HIGHWAY IN CORONA DEL MAR. Public Works Director Badum stated that the staff report provides the history on the matter. He noted that one of the key issues is that Coast Highway serves as a "main street" for the various villages throughout the city. He reported that the City has been frustrated with its ability to work with CalTrans to get projects and events approved, due to CalTrans' strict standards and guidelines. He stated that another issue has been the lack of the State's responsiveness to the citizens. CalTrans' priority is to provide regional transportation. Coast Highway is a regional facility and CalTrans has less of a concern for local issues. Public Works Director Badum reported that another issue is the synchronization of the traffic signals on Coast Highway. He stated that the City and CalTrans have negotiated an amount of $3.5 million that the State is willing to pay for the City to take over Coast Highway through Corona del Mar. The primary component�of the fee will be the paving projects that are needed and will be needed. Public Works Director Badum stated that the City Council needs to consider the long -term maintenance issues, which staff has estimated will cost approximately $600,000 per year. He stated that the cost is an average over a fifteen -year period. Public Works Director Badum stated that another issue is the liability, which is estimated to be approximately $100,000 per year. He noted that this is only an estimate and that it is hard to predict liability- Mayor Ridgeway asked if CalTrans would still control the traffic signals if the relinquishment occurs. Public Works Director Badum responded in the negative, but explained that the State Transportation Commission would require that nothing is done to affect regional traffic flow. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked which of the Vision 2004 streetscape improvements could still be done if the relinquishment does not occur. Public-.Works Director Badum stated that some of the improvement projects could still be done, but that the magnitude or degree might be affected. For example, he stated that the State requires a different lane width based on their highway standards, which would affect the plans for the medians. He stated that all of the improvements could most likely still be done, but that they may have to be changed because of the CalTrans standards. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the answer to the question is important because if most of Vision 2004 improvements Volume 56 - Page 791 INDEX (100 -2004) 0 0 0 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX could still be done under CalTrans' jurisdiction, the question is why would the City take over the long -term maintenance and liability of Coast Highway. City Manager Bludau referred to Exhibit E in the staff report, the Vision 2004 proposed budget worksheet, and stated that it appears that most of the projects could still be done. Council Member Webb confirmed with the City Manager that the pavement treatments to the streets and sidewalks are a part of the Vision 2004 plan, and asked if CalTrans would approve such projects. Public Works Director Badum stated that CalTrans would be concerned for the textured treatments to the streets, but that they have approved such treatments in other locations. Council Member Webb stated that whether CalTrans has control over Coast Highway or not, the City would still have to maintain the improvements. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he supports the Vision 2004 plan and voted in favor of the City going into negotiations with CalTrans. He stated, however, that possibly as much time should have been spent with CalTrans on the implementation of the Vision 2004 plan as was spent on the maintenance and liability issues. He stated that the plan might still be able to occur without the relinquishment occurring, and expressed his frustration and concern for the money that the State has already taken from the City. Regarding the liability issue, Council Member Bromberg stated that he's not sure if it's such a major concern. He explained that Coast Highway doesn't seem to be problematic and that CalTrans hasn't experienced major liability issues for defective design in the area. He further noted that the City fights claims everyday. Council Member Nichols stated that it is estimated to cost $3.5 million to bring Coast Highway to a "state of good repair ", which is normally done by CalTrans prior to a relinquishment. He stated that the $3.5 million that the City receives should be put into a fund, and explained that the estimated annual maintenance cost of $620,000 is an average cost over a period of time. He stated that the estimated cost of $100,000 for liability was too low; but is also areal cost. In summary, the cost to the City, over a fifteen -year period would total between $10 and $12 million. He felt that this is the amount that should have been received by the State. Additionally, Council Member Nichols stated that the Vision 2004 plan is expected to cost approximately $12 million. He asked where this money would come from and noted that $50,000 is the annual contribution from the Corona del Mar Business Improvement District (BID). Council Member Nichols also referred to the BID's budget estimates and stated that using their money; it would take 24 to 25 years to implement the plan. He didn't feel that they would see the increase in sales that would be needed, but that the $12 million could be available if the relinquishment did not take place- He stated that liability is another issue with regard to both the relinquishment and the improvements, and • that it doesn't make sense for the City to take control of Coast Highway. He also noted that the zoning in the general plan for other areas in the Volume 56 - Page 792 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX City is somewhat dependent upon the traffic that flows through Corona del Mar. He further explained that the parking in the area is limited and a problem. Council Member Heffernan asked what staffs recommendation is. City Manager Bludau stated that staff is not making a recommendation because it is a policy decision that needs to be made by the City Council. He noted, however, that financially, it is not a good deal for the City,.but that there are tradeoffs for the City Council to consider. Council Member Heffernan asked what staffs recommendation is for the funding of the Vision 2004 plan and what staffs opinion is on the issue of traffic flow through the area if the plan is implemented. City,Manager Bludau stated that staff does not desire to impede traffic flow: Public Works Director Badum further explained that CalTrans' would prefer wider lanes, but that he doesn't see anything in the Vision 2004 plan that would affect traffic flow. He even felt that it could be improved with a better coordination of the traffic signals. In response to the other question, City Manager Bludau stated that it will be up to the City Council to determine where the funding will come from when a review of the budget and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is done. Council Member Heffernan asked how the money from CalTrans would be spent. City Manager Bludau stated that his recommendation would be to set it for future road work in Corona del Mar. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the annual maintenance costs for Coast Highway are being. included in the budget. ` City Manager Bludau responded in the negative. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the costs associated with the Vision 2004 plan are included. Public Works Director Badum stated that the median project and the remainder of the pedestrian improvement project are included in the current budget, and that they total approximately $500,000. Mayor Ridgeway referred to a document he received from the Risk Manager that reported that CalTrans lost a case the week prior for $5.7 million. Itwas ruled''t1iaE the jury could decide to issue design immunity. He expressed his concern for the liability, as well as the maintenance that the City, would be taking on, in perpetuity. Risk Manager Farley stated that the City's insurance coverage protects the City for operations, and that design immunity is within the City's operations. The City can currently make.'a motion for design immunity for any claim alleging design negligence, which would make the City immune from the levying of a settlement. She stated that the recent case could result in the City losing that protection. In response to Council Member Rosansky's question, Risk Manager Farley stated that the City's self insured retention limit is $500,000. Council Member Rosansky confirmed that this means that the City would pay the first $500,000 per occurrence and would be covered above that point. Risk Manager Farley added that the City's current coverage is for up to $26 million. Volume 56 - Page 793 0 • City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 Mayor Ridgeway pointed out that the City paid a settlement several years ago for $28 million for a bicycle accident on Superior Avenue. Council Member Bromberg stated that such settlements are rare, and noted that Coast Highway is a flat road and in good shape. Additionally, he stated that the first five years of the maintenance for Coast Highway in Corona del Mar could come out of the $3.5 million that will be received from CalTrans. Council Member Webb asked how much CalTrans spends annually for maintenance of that section of Coast Highway. Public Works Director Badum reported that CalTrans has stated that they spend $72,000 annually. Public Works Director Badum stated that, to him, this means that they're not doing it right and that they don't maintain the roadway in a manner consistent with how the City would do it. He noted that the City constantly receives complaints about the conditions of the roadway. Council Member Webb stated that he doesn't believe that the City would spend $600,000 annually in maintenance. He noted several projects on Coast Highway that have already been completed and CalTrans' budget constraints. He felt that, overall, the City could provide better service to the community. In response to Council Member Rosansky's question, Public Works Director Badum stated that the $620,000 maintenance estimate would be for new expenditures. He noted that the City is currently maintaining the median landscaping, but that sweeping and other minor maintenance items are billed to CalTrans. The median landscaping maintenance would be in addition to the $620,000 estimate. Council Member Rosansky asked if the City would be liable, from a design standpoint, if the improvements were done and the relinquishment did not occur. Public Works Director Badum stated that the City would most likely have to assume some of the liability. City Attorney Burnham explained that the City would be liable pursuant to an encroachment permit or a contract authorizing the improvements. Mayor Pro, Tem Adams,stated that if a consultant is hired to do the design, the consultant would indemnify the City. City Attorney Burnham agreed and stated that the City would also be entitled to design immunity, irrespective of whether they conformed to CalTrans standards. The City, not CalTrans, would assume whatever liability resulted from the improvements. Debra Allen displayed a drawing of the Corona del Mar Vision 2004 Plan and emphasized that the plan was supported by the BID, the Corona del Mar Chamber of Commerce and the Corona del Mar Residents Association. She stated that taking over Coast Highway is a key element to the plan. She explained that CalTrans is only interested in moving traffic and will not approve the improvements. In regard to the case mentioned earlier, Ms. Allen stated that the court's decision did not eliminate design immunity. In regard to liability, Ms. Allen stated that the number of accidents that CalTrans has had to pay on is negligible. Volume 56 - Page 794 INDEX City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Further, she felt that the improvements will slow traffic, which should result in even fewer accidents. Mayor Ridgeway referred to the accident and claim history for fiscal years 1998199 to 2000101 for Corona del Mar, and stated that 327 accidents, 111 injuries and one fatality is not negligible. John Blom, BID Board Chairman, stated that people are afraid to cross Coast Highway in Corona del Mar. He noted that CalTrans removed two crosswalks when they did work in the roadway approximately five to six years ago, which shows that they don't want people to crossAhe street. He stated that Coast Highway divides that part of the city in half and prevents Corona del Mar from becoming a "village ". 'Additionally, he stated that increased safety means less liability, and that the Vision 2004 improvements will make the area safer. He stated that if the $3.5 million that is received from CalTrans is used wisely, it will maintain and keep the highway in good repair for ten years. Mr. Blom stated that revenue to the City will also increase because sales tax revenues and property values will increase. In closing, Mr. Blom stated that this is a unique opportunity for the City to control its own destiny and improve the quality of life in the community. Laura Dietz stated that when she ran for City Council, she strongly supported the BID and increased safety measures. She stated that pedestrians are scared to cross Coast Highway in Corona del Mar. She expressed her support and the support of others for local control of Coast Highway from Jamboree Road to Newport Coast Drive. Ed Selich, BID advisor, responded to Mayor Pro Tem Adams' earlier question about what improvements could be done if the relinquishment did not occur, by stating that the quality and intensity of the improvements could not be done if Coast Highway were under CalTrans control. Mr. Selich complimented City staff for their efforts with the negotiations and realized that the $3.5 million will need to be used for maintenance and upkeep_ ;:of.the highway. He stated that the BID will look for other: funding '....<:. , g sources for the plan improvements, but that it needs to know if the plan can be implemented in the manner it was designed, which would only occur under local control. Bob Calkins stated that traffic flow will be slowed down if the Vision 2004 plan is implemented, but that the agreement with CalTrans requires the City to insure the continuity of traffic flow. Mr. Calkins stated that he couldn't . understand how both could be done. In regard to liability, he stated that the improvements will increase liability due to the increased activities that will take place. Lastly, Mr. Calkins stated that if the City takes over Coast Highway, it will be forever and urged the City Council to consider the issue thoroughly before making a decision. Tina Hoover stated that the City needs to take responsibility and implement a plan that will improve safety. She stated that Corona del Mar is growing, and disagreed with those that cited liability and cost as Volume 56 - Page 795 0 u City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 reasons for not taking over Coast Highway. Ms. Hoover expressed her support of the relinquishment and felt that it could work. Mayor Ridgeway asked Ms. Hoover where the growth in Corona del Mar has been. Ms. Hoover stated that she is speaking of residential growth. Charles Masters expressed his support for the City taking control of Coast Highway. He felt that CalTrans ignores quality of life in Corona del Mar. Gary Naumann stated that if Coast Highway is Corona del Mar's "main street ", it should be treated like a neighborhood. He stated that the City should take advantage of this opportunity to take back control. He stated that traffic needs to be slowed down and the neighborhood' taken back. Chip Stasel stated that some of those in attendance at the current meeting can remember when Coast Highway was a dirt road. He stated that it has gotten where it's at because people have been progressive and open minded and taken risks. Mr. Stasel stated that Corona del Mar celebrates its 100 year anniversary this year. He urged the City Council to support the revitalization of Corona del Mar. Bernie Svalstad stated that Corona del Mar is the eastern entrance to Newport Beach and there has been an attempt to get CalTrans to approve the Vision 2004 median plan for two years. Mr. Svalstad stated that the medians are going in exactly where the striped medians currently exist, and .CalTrans still won't approve them. Secondly, he stated that the district's council representative should support what the residents and businesses in the area are asking for. B. J. Johnson, Chairman of the Residents Association, stated that there is nothing to divert traffic from entering Corona del Mar and suggested that a few signs be installed to divert traffic down Newport Coast Drive. Secondly, Ms. Johnson noted that the City did take over the control of MacArthur Boulevard, She asked the City Council to support the relinquishment of Coast Highway in Corona del Mar. Luvena Hayton stated that she has been a part of the community's efforts to get CalTran .to work with them and is convinced that CalTrans will not help Corona del Mar. Ms. Hayton stated that the City owes it to Corona del Mai to support the relinquishment. Jim Hildreth stated that safety should be a primary concern. He stated that the City needs to acknowledge that it's difficult to cross Coast Highway and do what it can to make it as safe as possible. In regard to parking, Mr. Hildreth stated that parking will be lost with the addition of the trees that he's seen in the plans, and he questioned if the proposed parking structures would benefit Corona del Mar. In closing, he hoped that the plan could be implemented with both aesthetics and safety taken into consideration. Volume 56 - Page 796 INDEX City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Wade Roberts stated that the main issue is quality of life and improvements have been made in other parts of the City to improve the quality of life in those areas. He also noted that the Vision 2004 plan isn't just for the businesses; it's also for the residents. He encouraged the City Council to support the relinquishment. Council Member Bromberg referred to the accident and claim history that was presented earlier, and confirmed with the Risk Manager that,the City did not pay out any money for claims in the,'area of the, relinquishment during the time period given. He hoped that this would dispel the liability concerns that some people are having:•;, Council Member Bromberg acknowledged those who spoke at the current meeting and stated that the relinquishment of Coast Highway allows the City to have a say and control of an area that is within'its; sphere. Council Member Bromberg stated that the relinquishment issue is not just about money, it's about community. CalTrans' does not'consider Corona del Mar a community and has been nonresponsive to previous requests. He stated that the Vision 2004 plan is critical to the formation of a true village atmosphere in Corona del Mar. In regard to the estimated annual maintenance costs of $600,000 to $700,000, he didn't feel that it would cost the City that much. He, agreed that the $3.5 million fund should be for maintenance issues and potential liability. Council Member Bromberg stated that Corona del Mar is made up of 12,000 people; it's a thoroughfare and a destination: He didn't feel that the City should turn its back on Corona del Mar. He noted that the City has not had a problem with taking control over MacArthur Boulevard, and felt that the City would make Coast Highway a better place and a safer place. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the $3.5 million could be put into a separate fund that couldn't be commingled with the general fund. City Attorney Burnham stated that it could be done, but that he wasn't sure if future City Councils would be bound to maintaining the fund. Council Member Webb stated that similar situations already exist within the City's budget. He noted the reserve funds that have been established for water and sewer projects. He thought the same could be done for construction projects on Coast Highway. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to accept the State's offer of $3,511,000 "State of Good Repair" estimate and direct staff to negotiate a Cooperative Agreement with the State to relinquish Coast Highway between Newport Coast Drive and Jamboree Road; and directed staff to set up a separate fund for the $3,511,000 that would be used solely for the maintenance and refurbishment of Coast Highway. Council Member Bromberg acknowledged that the separate fund may not be binding on future City Councils, but it would send a message as to the intent of the current City Council. Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated he still has a concern for the maintenance that has been deferred over the years and the facilities that need major Volume 56 - Page 797 0 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 investments. He stated that the relinquishment will only increase the inventory of facilities that the City will be responsible for over time. He stated that establishing the separate fund will help, but asked if there was a way to protect it. City Manager Bludau suggested that a Council policy could be adopted. Council Member Nichols stated that it is difficult for him to oppose a project that will beautify the City. He felt that the problem of Coast Highway becoming a thoroughfare through Corona del Mar is the result of decisions on roads in the past that could have provided alternate routes, and that an alternative doesn't currently exist. Council Member Nichols stated that he is responsible to the entire City when making decisions, and not just to a small group. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he will reluctantly support the relinquishment and that it is not an easy decision. He stated that if he was really looking at the greater City and the potential liability, he didn't know if he could support it. He also didn't feel that traffic would improve, but he did feel that the medians and the improvements that are being done are gorgeous. He agreed with the suggestion by Ms. Johnson to add signage. Mayor Pro Tern Adams agrees that CalTrans is nonresponsive to the Corona del Mar community. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: Nichols Abstain: None Absent: None 30. SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT PROCESS REVISIONS. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to 1) introduce Ordinance No. 2004.4 adding Chapter 11.03 of Title 11, deleting Chapter 5.10 from the NBMC pertaining to special events; and amending Exhibit A to Section 3.36.030 of Chapter 3.36, Cost Recovery for User Services; and 2) pass to second reading on April 13, 2004. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes:., Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None P. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Volume 56 - Page 798 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2004. Jim Hildreth stated that the City Council has violated the order in which it said it would do this and that it's being done for his benefit, so he is going to sue. He referred to page 752 of the regular meeting minutes and stated that not all of his comments were included. Additionally, he stated that his comments regarding the moorings in the Grand Canal were incorrectly recorded. He stated that there is no guarantee that the City's minutes are correct. Referring to the regular meeting minutes, Council Member Rosansky stated that he did not abstain on Item No. 20. Motion by Council Member Webb to waive reading of subject minutes, approve as amended by Council Member Rosansky and order filed. ffffilwm The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 6. BACK BAY SCIENCE CENTER — AUTHORIZATION TO C- 3481(E) ADVERTISE FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS. Back Bay Science Center Council Member Nichols stated that he thought that part of the funding (381100 -2004) could also be used elsewhere. City Attorney Burnham clarified that the American Trader oil spill funds that were dedicated to the project have been spent on the design to date and the only funds that the City is planning to commit have been earmarked for the Upper Newport Bay and total approximately $311,000. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to 1) authorize advertisement for construction bids; and'2) approve Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with Gail P. Pickart, P.E., for project management services for BackBay Science Center. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: f Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 7. APPROVAL OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT C -3484 WITH WRC CONSULTING SERVICES FOR PREPARATION OF A Buck Gully PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR BUCK GULLY STABILIZATION AND Stabilization andW Volume 56 - Page 799 City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 RESTORATION. Council Member Nichols stated that he's pleased that the Buck Gully issue is before the City Council. Motion by Council Member Nichols to approve a Professional Services Agreement with WRC Consulting Services, Inc. (WRC) of Anaheim for preparing a preliminary plan for Buck Gully stabilization, restoration and constructed wetlands at a negotiated fee of $85,664 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Drone 21. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION GRANT FUNDING REQUEST. Council Member Nichols stated that he wanted to acknowledge the General Services Director and stated that it seems to be a quality program. Motion by Council Member Nichols to authorize the General Services Director to submit a grant application to the California Department of Conservation Recycling Division in the amount of $22,197. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway. Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Q. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION — None R. ADJOURNMENT at 12:00 a.m. on March 24, 2004, in memory of Paul Ryckof£. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on March 17, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. The supplemental agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on March 19, 2004, at 1:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board . located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. Volume 56 - Page 900 INDEX Restoration Plan (381100 -2004) (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Regular Meeting March 23, 2004 INDEX Volume 56 - Page 801 0 E