Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Minutes - 08-10-2004Agenda Item No. 1 August 24, 2004 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session August 10, 2004 - 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: Heffernan, Adams — excused CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR - None. 2. BALBOA BAY CLUB UPDATE. City Manager Bludau reported that Council Member Bromberg requested this item. Planning Director Temple reported that the Balboa Bay Club has its occupancy permit and is in full operation. She indicated that the issues that were unresolved prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit have almost been fully resolved. She stated that there were building code issues related to path of travel and access which were resolved to the satisfaction of the building inspector. She noted that the Public Works Department had concerns about strict compliance with the approved site plan, particularly as it related to curbs and access to a portion of one of the parking structures. She stated that those were resolved by altering the landscaping, changing the way the kiosk operated, and understanding the access limitation to that portion of the parking structure. Ms. Temple stated that placing signs in appropriate locations took a bit of work between the Planning Department and the Club's sign consultants to ensure they were fabricated so they remained visible. She indicated that, after a couple of prototypes, City staff and Coastal Commission staff felt satisfied with the public access signage installations. She reported that there are public welcome signs at either side of the main entrance, and there are signs directing the public to the bay and to the hotel's public facilities. She added that there is a sign outside of the Club that indicates which facilities are fully accessible to the public. Ms. Temple indicated that there were issues regarding the maintenance of the public view corridors as established by the original Planned Community. She reported that the Club removed the vines that were installed in front of the open, wrought iron fence which would've covered the fence and obscured the sightline over time. She indicated that adjusting the exterior lighting to address concerns regarding glare and the concealment of light sources probably took the most amount of time and cost for the Club. Ms. Temple reported that the major issue is compliance with a Coastal Commission permit requirement regarding the accessibility of parking to the general public. She stated that special conditions were written which the Club believed to mean that the public had access to the facility because there was a Volume 56 - Page 1124 INDEX C -519 Balboa Bay Club (35)100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10. 2004 INDEX modest valet parking charge which allowed them entry. However, City staff and Coastal Commission staff felt this was not consistent with the spirit and intent of what they wanted to achieve relative to maintaining public accessibility to the property. She noted that the site is considered tidelands by the State and the prior use of a private club and private residential area were not consistent with tidelands uses. She reported that, in order to maintain the apartments, it was understood that the new part of the facility was to be publicly accessible and that the valet parking was probably an obstacle to that. She indicated that the Club proposed reinstating self parking, and this was approved by the Coastal Commission within the last couple of months. She added that the Club is in the process of bidding out and obtaining the equipment and signage necessary to implement this in about a month. Ms. Temple reported that, when the project was approved, there was a question about where physical public access could be achieved. She stated that the exhibit in the staff report depicts what was approved by the City and the Coastal Commission. She noted that there is a walkway that runs from the right side of the main entry to the front of the hotel bay front. She noted that the path is actually just short of the bayshores property line due to the driveway access to the east structure. She reported that there never was a requirement to make the beach accessible to the general public nor is there a public accessway in front of the apartment portion of the project since the area is constricted and would seldom be used. She added that the beach can only be used by members of the Club and anyone staying at the hotel. She stated that the City and the Coastal Commission were comfortable with this because the beach is small and already highly utilized. Council Member Bromberg stated that he had questions about the beach, but they were answered and added that he was not aware that the Coastal Commission weighed in on this issue. He requested and received clarification from Ms. Temple that people are currently required to use valet parking because the second plan has not been fully implemented yet. She stated that the first half hour of valet parking is free, but the next three hours can be charged cr made free by validation if they purchase goods or services at the hotel. She noted that additional signage and control gate mechanisms need to be installed before self parking can take place. She stated that the City did not place any restrictions on charging for parking and this is within the approval of the Coastal Commission. She indicated that unlimited free parking was not required. Council Member Bromberg indicated that there is always a comparison between Marinapark and the Balboa Bay Club. He asked that something come back relative to the history of the arrangement the City has with the Club. He noted that the facility is on tidelands and, even though the Club is open to the public, for all intensive purposes it is a private facility. He indicated that many people have felt uncomfortable entering the facility because it is more a private club than not. Council Member Rosansky stated that he has also heard parallels between the proposed Marinapark development and the Balboa Bay Club. He indicated that he hopes that whatever the City learned with the Balboa Bay Club will be applied to the Marinapark project, if the voters approve it, because public access is a concern. He stated that this may be a different situation since there are public streets on either side of Marinapark. Volume 56 - Page 112L City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX In response to Mayor Ridgeways questions, Ms. 'Temple indicated that there isn't a number of parking spaces that are dedicated for free parking. She stated that there currently is a sign that indicates that the first half hour of valet parking to the public is free and explains the additional time with validation. She indicated that the person currently at the kiosk will direct people to the valet station; however, when the change occurs, there will also be signage about self parking, signage with directions to the self parking location. and a person at the kiosk to assist the public. Mayor Ridgeway believed that there is some confusion at the kiosk, but at least the Coastal Commission and the Planning Department staff made it inviting to come through the front gate. Dave Wooten, CEO of the Balboa Bay Club, confirmed that the first half hour of valet parking is free and that there is up to three hours of free parking with validation for any purchase, even a stick of gum. He indicated that he does not have a count as to how many people use the site, but reported that they have 4,000 to 4,500 overnight rooms available per month and they are running in excess of 50% occupancy. He noted that well over 1,000 hotel guests will use the facility, emphasizing that this does not include people who come to the Club for lunch, drinks, dancing, or to walk around. Mr. Wooten stated that it disturbs them to hear that people didn't know that the Club was open to the public. He noted that the hotel is a public hotel and all the facilities to the left are open to the public, except for one dining room in the hotel that is for members only. Council Member Bromberg reported that he's been told that people don't feel welcome at the Club. He relayed what happened to him 1' /z hours ago when he pulled up to the kiosk and asked the guard if there was any parking for the public other than valet parking. Mr. Wooten reported that they are striving very hard to achieve a five diamond /five star rating and educate their staff to exhibit the highest standard of courtesy. He stated that he hears similar stories, but for every one of those stories, he hears many comments about the quality of the reception. Council Member Bromberg reported that this wasn't the first time this has happened to him. Mayor Ridgeway indicated that he was insistent to the kiosk guard about a month ago that there was a place for self parking. Mr. ]Wooten reported that there currently is no self parking and there will not be until they can install the controls that Ms. Temple mentioned. He believed that this may take about a month but he doesn't have a schedule for the installation of the equipment and signage. Mr. Wooten reported that they have a consultant who works with the Ritz Carlton and Four Seasons, and trains their employees how to interact with the public in a positive manner. He stated that what happened to Council Member Bromberg is serious and telling to him. He indicated that he will mention the incident to Mr. Shehan when he goes back to the Club. Council Member Bromberg reported that this also happened to him seven months ago. Mr. Wooten stated that he is happy to meet with the City Council to provide a history of the Balboa Bay Club as it relates to the City. Council Member Webb noted that he saw a 35th anniversary book about the Balboa Bay Club and asked if anything in the book relays the history. Mr. Wooten stated that he would be glad to provide Council with the book, Host of the Toast, noting that it will probably bring Council up to date until about 1955. He reported that a provision in the Volume 56 - Page 1126 Cite of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 1986 25 -year lease was that, if the Balboa Bay Club went through the redevelopment approval process, the Club would be given a new 50 -year lease. Council Member Nichols reported that when he went to the Club for meetings, the guard directed him to self parking which was abundant. He stated that he didn't feel like he was going into a private club and was pleased with his experiences. He indicated that he wasn't aware that he had to use valet parking. Dolores Otting, Newport Beach, stated that she was happy when the signs along Coast Highway were taken down; however, sometimes the signs welcoming the public have fallen over or are in the bushes. She indicated that, when the public enters the Club, they come in from the other side. She stated that the Club installed a bench, but suggested installing another bench and a trash can. She asked how much parking costs and when they started paying full lease rent to the City. She noted that they advertise on the radio and do want people to come there. Council Member Webb reported that the Club has been paying full rent since April 2003. Ms. Temple clarified that there were problems with the temporary prototype signs; however, there shouldn't be any problems with the permanent signs. MARINE LIFE REFUGE PROGRAM BY SURFRIDER. Assistant City Manager Kiff stated that this first came to the Coastal/Bay Water Quality Committee and it was suggested that Surfrider bring this concept to Council. Nancy Hastings, Southern California Field Coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation, stated that Surfrider and the Orange County Coastkeepers request that Council support the implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA). She utilized a PowerPoint presentation, reporting that the MLPA and the Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act both passed legislation in 1999. She stated that the MLPA mandates a redesign of California's marine protected areas (MPA) to improve the protection of marine life, habitat, and ecosystems. She noted that this is the Department of Fish and Game's responsibility, She indicated that the Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act focuses on simplifying the way MPAs are classified. Ms. Hastings stated that the goals of the MLPA go beyond fishing regulations and discusses ecosystem management. She reported that the MLPA protects diversity, abundance of marine life, structure, function, and integrity of the ecosystems; improves recreational and educational research opportunities provided by these areas that have limited disturbances from man; sustains, conserves, and protects marine life population; and protects areas for their natural heritage for their intrinsic value. Ms. Hastings reported that an MPA is any area in the marine environment that's set aside by Federal, State, territorial, tribal, or local laws to provide long term protection for some or all of the resources inside the boundaries. She stated that natural events affect the marine ecosystems; however habitat destruction, over fishing, introduced species, pollution, and coastal development also affects the ecosystems. She reported that over fishing occurs when people take resources out of the ocean at a rate in which it can no longer sustain itself. She stated that another type of habitat destruction occurs when top predators are taken out of the food chain. Volume 56 -Page 1127 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Ms. Hastings reported that there are over 2,000 MPAs in the world, but less than 1% of the world's oceans and less than .01% of United State's oceans are "no take marine reserves ". She noted that there are 62 MPAs in California, but 19 of them are marine reserves. She reported that the only no take marine reserve in Orange County is at Heisler Park, but it is very small. Ms. Hastings displayed a map of MPAs in Orange County and clarified that a lot of the areas were established in the 1960s and 1970s with the science that was available then. She indicated that science today tells them that these areas need to have better connectivity and larvae dispersal, and the currents need to be taken into account. Further, some of these areas are areas of special biological significance which deal with illegal discharges but nothing to do with protecting the species or habitat within them. She stated that there is scientific consensus that MPAs will increase the size of individuals, increase population density, create greater biodiversity within the regions, and preserve ecosystem integrity. Ms. Hastings reported that when fish get fat and old, they reproduce exponentially. However, even with catch limits, bigger fish are still allowed to be caught. Ms. Hastings reported that, when the law passed in 1999, scientists came up with the maps, which meant there was no public involvement. She stated that, in 2002 -2003, they started again with seven regional working groups that included a broad range of stakeholders. She indicated that they were having a lot of progress until the budget crisis hit, and the process fell apart in January 2004 when they put the MLPA on indefinite hold. She reported that, when Governor Schwarzenegger released his Ocean Resources Management Strategy, the Department of Fish and Game updated its website and indicated that there was a renewed interest in implementing the law. She noted that it will start in the central coast region and all other regions will be implemented between 2006 and 2011. Ms. Hastings stated that waiting until 2011 is not good enough since there are affordable ways to implement this sooner. She requested that Council adopt a resolution asking that this be implemented as creatively and as quickly as possible, and that it involve all the stakeholders (scientists, commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen, and anyone else who has an interest in protecting these resources). In response to Council Member Webb's questions, Ms. Hastings stated that there is a huge concern about managing and monitoring the areas once they are established. She indicated that an affordable way to implement this is to look at areas that already have land -based management. She noted that Crystal Cove State Park has State staff on land and, since California waters only extend three miles, it would not be too difficult to train them to use binoculars to see if there is illegal activity or fishing occurring and to report it to the Department of Fish and Game. She stated that this would cut down their responsibility for doing ocean - based management and monitoring. Ms. Hastings added that the Orange County Coastkeepers conducts kelp restoration projects and are always on the water monitoring those areas. Nancy Gardner stated that non - profit groups like Surfrider and Coastkeepers can approach the scientific community who will sometimes volunteer their time. She indicated that they will be working also to bring in stakeholders and not depend on the State's budget to do this process for them. Volume 56 - Page 1128 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 Assistant Uity Manager Kitt noted that there is a draft resolution in the statt report and that it will be brought back to Council at the next regular meeting. Ms. Hastings requested an opportunity to update the resolution to say they want the MLPA to be implemented in Southern California. She reported that they presented outreach packets to the Coastal/Bay Water Quality Committee and have extras if Council wants them. City Manager Bludau asked if there are any areas along the coast in more need of protection. Ms. Hastings indicated that the majority o:f the California coastline has been hammered. She stated that areas should also be identified that were once abundant but aren't anymore, set them up as a marine reserve, and allow the science community and Coastkeepers the opportunity to restore the area. She added that this has minimal displacement of the fishermen. Mayor Ridgeway agreed that the waters here have been over - fished. He stated that he chairs the CoastalBay Water Quality Committee and was concerned about the fishing industry not participating in the process; however, as written, the fishing industry is invited and made a part of the resolution. Council '.Member Bromberg stated that he would like to see this come back. He indicated that the fishing industry should attend the meeting and weigh in on this issue. He noted that the City has been recognized nationally for what it does with the saltwater and this resolution is just another thing that should be done. Council Member Webb suggested that. "That the foregoing is true, correct and adopted" be deleted in the resolution. 4. TRAFFIC COLLISIONS RESULTING FROM RED LIGHT VIOLATIONS. Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston reported that this was brought to Council at the request of Council Member Webb. He indicated that there is an error to the table for Jamboree/bfacArthur, reporting that the total average collision should be 11.67 and the percentage should be 26 %. He stated that he read the traffic and collision reports for the intersections listed and reported that there is almost no mention of what the drivers were doing at the Jamboree/Bristol South intersection that led to them running the red light. However, at Bristol North /Campus, there were quite a few reports in which the driver looked away and the light was red when they looked up again. Mr. Edmonston reported that he talked to Costa Mesa and Garden Grove who use photo enforcement. He stated that he did not get a lot of information about how they determined the locations, but they generally look at areas with the higher number of accidents related to red lights. He indicated that Costa Mesa paid their vendor a fee to monitor the intersections and determine if there are sufficient number of violations to warrant the installation of the equipment. He stated that, once installed, Costa Mesa gets a flat rate per intersection plus a set amount per citation. He emphasized that, by law, every citation is reviewed and issued by a police officer. Further, if a person is within the first half second of the red light, typically they do not cite the driver since they generally aren't the violators that are causing problems. Volume 56 -Page 1129 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Mr. Edmonston believed that, at Bristol North /Uampus, the cycle length throws motorists off because the green light is on only half the length of time as usual. He reported that the two intersections having nine collision violations a year (Bristol North /Campus and Bristol South/Jamboree) are intersections that have large sign structures on the approach that attempts to tell drivers which lane they should be in. He stated that none of the drivers involved in the accidents at Bristol North/Campus mentioned the signs; however, a number of drivers at Bristol South /Jamboree indicated that they were looking at the sign and trying to figure out which lane they should be in. He noted that there used to be a lot of red light violations northbound on Jamboree, but Caltrans moved the sign further away from the intersection. He stated that this might be considered at these two locations since the City is positioned to take over those intersections and signs later this year through their relinquishment of that piece of Route 73. Council Member Webb asked if Costa Mesa has seen a reduction of accidents at the intersections with red light monitoring systems. Mr. Edmonston stated that they have not done a lot of analysis because it has been a short period of time. He reported that Garden Grove has seen a reduction and noted that their primary problem was that people ran the red light four or five seconds after it turned red in order to make a left turn. Mr. Edmonston believed that a more detailed report of the red light monitoring systems and experiences from cities that have used them would be appropriate. He stated that the Costa Mesa Public Works Department indicated that this has generated more work for their staff than they anticipated. He noted that vendors were anxious a couple of years ago to put in demonstration locations, but he is not sure if this is still the case. Council Member Webb stated that he asked for a report because there was a fatality in June at Bristol North /Campus. He noted that almost 71% of the collisions at the intersection happened because someone ran a red light. He expressed the opinion that the City needs to look at the intersections that are 50% and above. He stated that the Police Department has a device which determines if people have ran a red light, but they are not there 24 hours a day. He indicated that, if the City can't install this type of system. it needs to look at some other system to try to reduce the number of people running red lights. Council Member Nichols stated that he went to traffic court. He noted that red light tickets are one of the most expensive tickets and 75% of the people were there because they ran a red light. He reported that 300 tickets were repealed that were issued by Costa Mesa because the yellow light was not long enough. He stated that he is worried that this could occur. He indicated that someone ran a red light at MacArthur /Campus and he hit him. He noted that the intersection is very wide and asked if they are given enough yellow time. Mr. Edmonston reported that Costa Mesa installed cameras at locations where the signals were controlled by Caltrans. He noted that the law requires that the yellow time be at least as long as what the Caltrans manual states it should be and, in Costa Mesa's case, Caltrans' signals weren't long enough. He pointed out that the City controls its signals and would be issuing the citations. He emphasized that a yellow light is designed to give people enough time to stop as they approach an intersection. He added that, if there are problems with cars not clearing the intersection, they could put in a period of all red lights so no one is moving until the cars clear the intersection. He indicated that this is one of the Volume 56 - Page 1130 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX reported advantages of the Costa Mesa vendor because their system won't give the other direction a green light if it detects that a car may run a red light. He noted that, if someone is going to be five or six seconds late, their detection zone may not extend that far down the street. Mr. Edmonston reported that when the City did its traffic signal optimization study, which will be brought to Council in two weeks, they had very limited refinements to Bristol Street because Caltrans has all seven intersections interconnected electronically. He stated that it is running as best it can so traffic is not backed up into the adjacent intersections. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he is not a fan of photo enforcement. He indicated that, if there is a problem at Bristol North/Campus, it should be looked at and other methods should also be reviewed to mitigate traffic collisions. He believed that photo enforcement is the last resort. Council Member Rosansky believed that the photo enforced intersections in Costa Mesa are effective, but stated that people are almost stopping too soon at those intersections. He asked if they are almost creating rear - enders. Mr. Edmonston stated that this would be useful information if the City wanted to pursue this. Council Member Rosansky indicated that this should not be a way to generate revenue but the City should find a way to fix the problem. Council Member Webb stated that he is interested in getting something started in an area that has an excessive number of people running red lights. He indicated that, if they are causing accidents, the City is obligated to look into as many different things as possible and not rule out photo enforcement. Mr. Edmonston reported that they purchased a traffic accident database program through a grant. He stated that they are having trouble at the Bristol Street corridor because the program thinks its just one street. He indicated that they manually separate the data for the two intersections. He reported that they wanted this program so they could determine where the highest number of accidents were occurring and then do engineering investigation. Council '.Member Nichols indicated that he wouldn't support photo enforcement. He noted that the offset intersection and offset traffic lights at Goldenrod/ Coast Highway are working well and people aren't getting stuck: in the intersection. City Manager Bludau emphasized that staff would .never recommend photo enforcement based on increased revenues to the Cite. He asked when the relinquishment will occur. Mr. Edmonston reported that it will occur in October/November 2004. Regarding Bristol Street, he confirmed that the street has a set electronic sequencing time. Mayor Ridgeway believed that one of the most difficult intersections is Bristol North/Birch since there is a freeway off ramp. He stated that photo enforcement would not do anything there. Council Member Bromberg agreed that he hopes the City never sees photo enforcement. He complimented Mr. Edmonston and staff for doing a great job. He added that people have told him that the photo enforcement lights are targets for bb guns. Volume 56 - Page 1121 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 City Manager Bludau noted that the traffic synchronization project will be brought back at the neat study session. In response to Council Member Nichols' question about the light at MacArthur/ San Joaquin Hills, Mr. Edmonston reported that the pavement on San Joaquin Hills failed and the loops had lifted up out of the pavement. He stated that General Services repaved it and the company needs to hook the loops into the cabinets. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT - at 5:35 p.rrL to Closed Session to discuss matters regarding the Coyote Canyon Landfill. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on August 4, 2004, at 4:30 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 1132 INDEX City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY. Volume 56 - Page 1133 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes T D/� ��('r Regular Meeting August 10, 2004 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX STUDY SESSION — 4:00 p.m CLOSED SESSION — 5:35 p.m. A. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING B. ROLL CALL Present: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: Heffernan (excused), Adams (excused) C. CLOSED SESSION REPORT - None D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Rosansky E. INVOCATION — Reverend Dr. George R. Crisp, Christ Church by the Sea United Methodist PRESENTATIONS Marine Battalion 1/1 Presentation. Council Member Bromberg acknowledged those in attendance at the meeting from the Camp Pendleton 1st Battalion, 1=t Marine, and the 1/1 Newport Beach Committee, which is comprised of seven former Marines and one former Air Force member. Council Member Bromberg announced that the P1 Battalion, 1s' Marines are the most decorated Marine Corps unit in the history of the United States. Lieutenant Colonel Furness introduced several members of the 1/1 leadership team, and read messages from the Commandant of the Marine Corps and Commanding General James N. Mattis to the citizens and City Council of Newport Beach. The messages acknowledged the contributions of Newport Beach to the Marine Corps family and appreciation for that support. Lieutenant Colonel Furness also expressed his gratification on behalf of the Marines, and presented a plaque to Mayor Ridgeway and Council Member Bromberg. Presentation of Resolutions to City Attorney Burnham who is retiring August 13, 2004. Mayor Ridgeway presented a resolution from Senator Ross Johnson to City Attorney Burnham, as well as a resolution from the City Council expressing appreciation for the numerous and lasting positive contributions he has made to Newport Beach City government and the community over the past 24 years. City Attorney Burnham thanked the City Council and the community for the acknowledgement. Volume 56 - Page 1134 (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 G. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC INDEX H. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEMI: • Council Member Nichols announced that the Shakespeare Festival took place during the weekend of August 7 & S, 2004, in Corona del Mar. He acknowledged those that attended and the City departments that provided services. • Council Member Webb announced that the City Centennial 2006 Committee has been meeting the first Thursday of each month and is in the process of establishing a mission, adopting; a logo and beginning preparations for the centennial celebration. • Council Member Webb acknowledged the Police Department for putting on the Annual Night Out on August 3, 2004. • Council Member Bromberg requested that staff look into an enforcement issue at Lookout Point on Ocean Boulevard in Corona del Mar regarding the continued and regular use of alcohol in the park. He stated that it's a problem because the park is located in the middle of a residential neighborhood, and suggested that Code Enforcement and the Police Department meet with the area homeowners to discuss the issue. • Council Member Rosansky announced that a significant project will begin in West Newport within the next couple of week:;. He explained that the Army Corps of Engineers will begin a dredging project in the Santa Ana River and that the sand that is dredged will be placed on the beach between approximately 32.d and 56t' Streets. He announced that a public meeting will be held on August 18, 2004, at 7:00 p.m., to provide information and answer questions about the project. The project will take place over a two to three -month period and access to the beach will be limited. • Mayor Ridgeway announced that the Upper Newport Bay dredge project is not budgeted, but that a contingent met earlier in the day with Congressman Christopher Cox. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he is cautiously optimistic that a funding source will be provided and the project will begin in the Spring of 2005. I. CONSENT CALENDAR RENDING OFMINUTES/ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 2. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. Volume 56 - Page 1185 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10. 2004 INDEX 3. 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. RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION 4. CORONA DEL MAR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT RENEWAL: ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2003 -2004 FISCAL YEAR; AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO LEVY FOR 2004 -2005 FISCAL YEAR. 1) Approve the Corona del Mar Business Improvement District 2003.2004 Annual Report; and 2) adopt Resolution of Intention No. 2004 -72 to Levy Assessments and set the public hearing for August 24, 2004. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 5. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JENNIFER BRANIN FOR NEWPORT COAST ASSESSMENT DISTRICT REVIEW (contd. from 7/27/04). Authorize the City Manager to execute an $18,000 Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Jennifer Branin of Branin Finance to complete her review of Newport Coast assessment district financial data. 6. BUDGET AMENDMENT AND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH EIP ASSOCIATES TO CONDUCT SEPARATE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSIONS DURING THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROCESS. 1) Approve budget amendment (05BA -007) appropriating $17.250 from the General Fund Unappropriated Reserves to Account 2710 -8293 for the additional consultant costs associated with conducting separate study sessions for the City Council and Planning Commission as part of the General Plan Update process; and 2) approve second amendment to agreement with EIP Associates. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 7. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. S. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 9. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by Mayor Ridgeway. 10. BUDGET AMENDMENT — CONTRACT CLASSES. Approve a budget amendment (05BA -008) to increase the Revenue and Expenditures Accounts due to increased registration and new contract classes, which require additional monitoring from temporary part -time staff and payments to instructors. 11. APPROVAL OF TASTE OF NEWPORT Volume 56 - Page 1136 BANNERS (100 -2004) C -3720 Assessment District Review (38/100 -2004) C -3620 General Plan Update Process (38 /100 -2004) (100 -1004) — 1 (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 ENCROACHMENT PERMIT N2004 -0264. Conditionally approve the request of the Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce for the installation of 217 banners, from August 16, 2004 to September 14, 2004 for the annual Taste of Newport (installation shall be along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, Westcliff Drive, San Joaquin Hills Road, Newport Center Drive East/4Vest, and Newport Center Drive). 12. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 12). The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ricgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 9. BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ACCEPT A CHECK FROM THE NEWPORT BEACH LIBRARY FOUNDATION AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR CIP BUDGET FOR FY 2004 -05 [taken out of order]. Tom Edwards, Newport Beach Public Library Foundation, thanked the members of the foundation, those that have provided donations and the City's librarian for their contributions to the City's library system. He presented a facsimile check in the amount of $97,798 to the Chairman of the Board of Library Trustees. Harry Hamilton. Chairman Hamilton thanked the foundation and the City Council. He stated that the foundation allows the library to enhance its operations. He listed some of the enhancements, programs and services offered by the library. Mayor Ridgeway also thanked the foundation for their efforts and acknowledged the programs offered by the library. Council Member Webb additionally thanked the foundation for their support of the new Mariners Library. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to approve a budget amendment (05BA -006) to increase expenditure appropriations by $97,798 in Account No. 7011- C4010796 and to increase revenue estimates for the same amount in Account No. 4010 -5901. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams Volume 56 - Page 1137 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 PUBLIC HEARINGS 13. NEWPORT SPORTS MUSEUM, 100 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE (PA2004 -092); GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -001; AND USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -017. Council Member Rosansky recused himself from voting on the item due to a possible conflict. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. John Hamilton, Newport Sports Museum, stated that he agrees with the information contained in the staff report, and thanked the City Council for their support. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Ridgeway closed the public hearing Motion by Council Member Brombert to adopt Resolution No. 2004- 73 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -001 and Use Permit No. 2004 -017 that increases the development allocation of Block 100 by 1.550 square feet and approves a museum use in the Administrative, Professional and Financial District for property located at 100 Newport Center Drive (PA2004 -092). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: Rosansky Absent: Heffernan, Adams 14. REVISIONS TO APPEAL AND CALL FOR REVIEW PROCEDURES — CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -002 (PA2004 -028) (contd. from 6/8/04, 6/22/04 & 7/13/04). Senior Planner Alford stated that the staff report contains five options for the City Council to consider. The options included the procedure followed prior to 1994 which required four affirmative votes of the City Council, the current procedure which allows any member of the City Council to call an item up for review, the Planning Commission recommendation to require two members to make a request through the City Clerk's office, the alternate two- member option which requires the request to occur at a City Council meeting and the alternate single- member option which allows the appeal to occur at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Senior Planner Alford stated that staff is also asking the City Council to provide direction on the recommendation to eliminate the call for review procedure and treat all calls for review and appeals, as appeals. In response to Council Member Nichols' request, Senior Planner Alford explained that eliminating the call for review distinction from the code was suggested during the Planning Commission process. Assistant City Volume 56 - Page 1138 INDEX (100 -2004) (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Manager Wood further clarified that council members would still be able to file an appeal, or cause an item to be brought to the City Council for review. It would just result in both procedures being called by the same name. City Attorney Burnham confirmed that it is only a change in the terminology being used. Senior Planner Alford further confirmed that a fee would still be required for appeals filed by the public. Council Member Bromberg stated that he is the one who initiated a change to the current appeal and call for review procedure. He asked if the Planning Commission's procedure would also have to be changed or if their procedure could remain as is. Senior Planner Alford confirmed that the Planning Commission desires to have their procedure remain the same, which allows any member to call an item up for review, but that the City Council could make the change to both procedures. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the main consequence of making any change is that it delays the time for when a project is finally approved. In response to Council Member Rosansky's question, Senior Planner Alford reported that there were no City Council call ups in 2002, four in 2003 and four to date in 2004. Council Member Bromberg stated that part of the problem in reviewing a project is the expense and time incurred by the proponents, although he felt that it was a reasonable tradeoff to extend the deadline to make sure that any problems with a project were reviewed. He felt that the alternate single- member option with a simple majority vote requirement might make the most sense because if a council member has a concern, he can express it and see if the majority of the City Council concurs with his opinion. He also felt that the alternate two-member option would work, but that a change from the current procedure is needed. Council Member Rosansky asked if the analysis of the call ups included information on if the ultimate decision was overturned or modified. Senior Planned Alford responded in the negative. Council Member Rosansky noted that it is therefore unknown if the call ups have resulted in any changes or if they have just delayed projects. Senior Planner Alford didn't recall many decisions being overturned. City Manager Bludau recalled that the last four call ups did not result in the Planning Commission decision being overturned. Council Member Nichols clarified that the preferred option by Council Member Bromberg would not result in a violation of the Brown Act because the council member who is desiring an appeal would be making his comments to the City Council at a public meeting. He stated, however, that it presents a problem because he felt that some kind of contact would have to be made with the council members prior to the meeting in order to obtain a majority vote. He also felt that the option makes the City Council subservient to the Planning Commission because they would only need one member to call an item up for review. Council Member Rosansky stated that four call ups doesn't necessarily Volume 56 - Page 1139 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX represent a huge disruption, although he could possibly support a higher level of scrutiny. He agreed with the comments of Council Member Nichols and stated that he would be more in favor of the alternate two - member option. Additionally, Council Member Rosansky stated that whichever option is chosen, there should be a requirement that the council member provide the reason for the call up. He stated that this would be fairer to the applicant. Dolores Otting stated that she couldn't understand why this is such an issue, noting that there were only four call ups last year. Additionally, she noted that a council member can contact two other council members and not be in violation of the Brown Act. Ms. Otting stated that with the current City Council support for a call up can often depend upon which council member is making the call up. She suggested that call ups by the council member whose district the project is located within be supported, as has been done in the past. She expressed her opposition to changing the current procedure, and explained that there's nothing wrong with what's being done now, the Planning Commission shouldn't have more power than the City Council and a change shouldn't be made because of the action of a single council member. Jim Hildreth stated that the procedure should not be changed. One council member should be able to call an item up for review. Council Member Bromberg stated that project proponents shouldn't have to go through the time and expense involved when one person disagrees with the actions of the Planning Commission. He stated that the alternate single- member option used to work well, and that the simple majority requirement indicates if there's serious interest in reviewing an item or a legitimate concern that might need to be addressed. Council Member Bromberg stated that he would be in support of the alternate single- member option as long as it does not apply to the Planning Commission and how they conduct their business. He asked if the distinction between calls for review and appeals was important to staff. Senior Planner Alford stated that there has been some confusion in the past and that a solution was suggested to call everything an "appeal ". Assistant City Manager Wood stated that staff would prefer that both appeals and calls for review be called "appeals" to avoid any confusion. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to select the Alternate Single - Member Option, determine that all calls for review and appeals be called "appeals ", require that the reason for an appeal by a council member be given and continue the hearing to August 24, 2004. In response to Council Member Nichols' question regarding the Brown Act, City Attorney Burnham explained that council members can talk with one another and discuss issues. The Brown Act prohibits council members from discussing issues outside the public meeting process in an effort to reach a collective consensus or decision. He further clarified that council members can express their views to the other council members outside the public meeting process, but an agreement by the council members on the views cannot be reached outside of the public meeting Volume 56 - Page 1140 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 process. City Manager Bludau stated that the intent of the alternate single- member option is to make sure that the argument for an appeal is persuasive enough that the majority of the City Council agrees with the appeal, even if it's heard for the first time in the public forum. Council Member Bromberg confirmed that the change does not affect the member of the public who wants to appeal a decision of the Planning Commission. Council Member Nichols confirmed that a council member could appeal a decision as a citizen and pay the fee, and not be required to obtain a simple majority vote of the City Council. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: Nichols Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 15. ZONING AMENDMENT /RECOVERY FACILITIES (contd. from 7/27/04). City Attorney Burnham stated that the proposed ordinance generally prohibits group living uses in residential districts, with a couple of exceptions. He explained that group uses with six or fewer handicapped individuals are permitted in all residential districts. Secondly, group living uses with seven or more handicapped individuals are permitted in R -1.5, R -2 and MFR districts, with a Federal exception permit. The Planning Commission makes the initial determination on a Federal exception permit. He introduced Jeffrey Goldfarb, special counsel on the issue. City Attorney Burnham stated that the differences in the ordinance being introduced at the current meeting and the ordinance that was presented to the City Council at the meeting of July 27, 2004, include extensive findings that explain the rationale for adopting the regulations. Another change is a modification to the definition of "single housekeeping unit ". He explained that transiency of occupants is relevant only in R -1 and R -A zones. The reference to transiency in the findings for approving a Federal exception permit has also been deleted. Lastly, City Attorney Burnham stated that standard conditions to a Federal exception permit have been added and that they are similar to the conditions that are standard for short -term lodging permits. He stated that the modifications to the ordinance reflect a number of the comments received from the community at the previous City Council meeting. Council Member Rosansky referred to the definition of "single housekeeping unit" in the proposed ordinance and asked for an explanation of why the group must be a non - transient group in the R -1 and R -A zones. City Attorney Burnham stated that it reflects the notion that group living uses involving seven or more occupants, whether Volume 56 -Page 11411 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX they are handicapped or not, are prohibited in the R -1 and R.A districts. Mr. Goldfarb added that the rationale is also based on the testimony that was received regarding issues of short -term uses that exist in the other residential zones of the City. He explained that all short -term uses potentially create issues and the intent was to revise the ordinance to treat all short -term uses in a similar fashion. Mayor Ridgeway confirmed that for six or fewer handicapped individuals, the City cannot identify standards. For seven or more, the standards are similar to those for short -term lodging. City Attorney Burnham noted that the standards are contained in Section 20.91.040. Mayor Ridgeway stated that "consumption of alcohol" in 20.91.040(C)(3) is redundant. He explained that once an individual consumes alcohol, they are no longer considered disabled and are no longer protected by the law. Mr. Goldfarb agreed, but stated that the regulations apply not only to individuals, but to the facilities themselves. City Attorney Burnham added that there are also those individuals who are handicapped for reasons other than alcoholism. Council Member Bromberg asked for an explanation of the verdict against the City of Long Beach and how it compares to what Newport Beach is dealing with. City Attorney Burnham stated that the case in Long Beach related to alleged efforts and enforcement actions on the part of the City of Long Beach to thwart the establishment of a series of residential treatment facilities for Alzheimer's patients. He stated that the proposed ordinance before the City Council at the current meeting fully complies with Federal and State law. Mayor Ridgeway noted the number of individuals in the audience wishing to speak on the item. He Stated that he will probably stop those speakers who present the same information that they've already presented at previous City Council meetings on the subject. Mayor Ridgeway opened the public hearing. Barbara Roy stated that she lives 30 feet from the recovery home at 1810 West Oceanfront and wasn't prepared for the negative impact that the operation would have on the neighborhood- She stated that she and her neighbors were overwhelmed by the shear density of the project and the escalation in traffic. She stated that it has been a long struggle to preserve the character of the neighborhood, and expressed her support for the proposed ordinance. Carol Martin stated that she is a resident of the 1800 block of West Oceanfront and is in support of the proposed ordinance. She hoped that it would provide guidelines for existing facilities and ensure that any new facilities would fit within the character of a residential neighborhood. Jim Hildreth stated that there is nothing in the proposed ordinance addressing the safety of children, limitations on the density of recovery facilities, their proximity to schools or how they will affect the neighborhoods. He hoped that the people that the run the facilities will Volume 56 - Page 1142 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDM', keep the public in mind and that the City will enforce the regulations. Jon Stearman, Narconon, stated that the State has already defined, with respect to campus, the number of feet that is allowable. He stated that it is 300 feet or less, and explained that the State does not want a concentration of any facility because it would be contrary to the purpose of Federal and State laws addressing recovery facilities. Mr. Goldfarb stated that State law addresses the concentration of facilities within proximity to each other. The campusing issue addresses a different concern, which is a number of facilities directing all of their residents to a single location. He stated that this is not preempted by the State provision. City Attorney Burnham added, however, that staff would have no objection to changing the language in the definition of "campus" from 300 vards to 300 feet. Mr. Stearman concluded his comments by stating that Narconon is licensed by the State, and always has been. Unannounced inspections of the facility have also been conducted. Council Member Nichols asked if Narconon rented a place across the alley from their facility. Mr. Stearman responded in the affirmative and added that in retrospect, it was an error to do so. Council Member Nichols asked if Narconon obtained a California license for the rental unit. Mr. Stearman responded in the negative and explained that it was not necessary, on the basis that it was not a part of their operation. In response to additional questions, Mr. Stearman added that their State license covers their entire facility, and that it is considered one facility. He was unaware if money was received by Narconon for those using the rental. Larry Trayhem, Executive Director of Narconcn, stated that once an individual has received treatment for his particular situation, he can move to sober living. The rental unit referred to earlier was for sober living. Council Member Nichols asked if Narconon receives money for those in sober living. Mr. Trayhem responded in the negative and explained that there is a one -time fee that is paid by the individual for treatment, sober living and additional treatment, if necessary. In response to Council Member Bromberg's question, Mr. Trayhem stated that the rental didn't have to be licensed because there were six or fewer individuals per unit. City Attorney Burnham asked if the unannouncE d inspections conducted at the facility were done by the State. Mr. Stearman responded in the affirmative and explained that the State has a :hotline that anyone can call anonymously. He stated that Narconon takes them very seriously, but there were several and the State determined that they were frivolous. Michael Backus stated that he lives 27 feet from 1811 West Oceanfront, the facility that was rented in error, and that he has personally witnessed Narconon conducting business at the site. He asked the City Council to support the proposed ordinance. Volume 56 - Page 1143 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Frank Utain stated that he owns the property directly behind the property in question and that he has wanted to develop the property into a duplex, but hasn't because of the situation across the alley. He stated that it's a commercial operation and shouldn't be allowed on a 30 -foot lot. He asked the City to do something about the situation. Chris Boge stated that the proposed ordinance is facially invalid because it does not substantially further any legitimate government interest, and invalid and unenforceable because it deprives disabled persons equal protection of the law by requiring a Federal exception permit, which is not consistent with Federal statutory law. He stated that the proposed ordinance does not reasonably accommodate handicapped individuals and is discriminatory. Mr. Boge provided information to substantiate his comments. City Attorney Burnham disagreed and stated that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the law. He explained that the City normally prohibits group living uses, but actually creates an exception for handicapped persons. Mr. Goldfarb added that the proposed ordinance deals with the problems in the City associated with short -term group living environments, such as trash and noise. The ordinance does not direct whether individuals can live together or not, but simply create'; a code of conduct applicable to all different types of group living environments. In addition, the Federal exception permit is the procedural mechanism for providing reasonable accommodation. Eric Cattel stated that in addition to the $22.5 million settlement against the City of Long Beach, there have been a number of other recent cases. He stated that the most relevant one is the City of Taylor, Michigan, which refused to allow a residential facility of disabled adults to house more than six residents because the facility was to be located in a single - family zoned area. He stated that Taylor was found to have failed to make reasonable accommodation. Mr. Cattel listed additional settlements. Tim Chapman stated that he is the director of several residential treatment programs licensed in the State, and has firsthand experience in the operation and impact of treatment facilities in the communities, as well as to the individuals. Mr. Chapman stated that nearly everyone has been impacted by addiction, but many don't understand the treatment or recovery environment, or the laws that govern them. He stated that treatment facilities are valuable and necessary, and some work best with six or fewer individuals and others work best with seven or more. Dave Silver stated that the intent of the proposed ordinance appears to be to remove rehabilitation facilities from the City. Mr. Silver stated that nobody wants to live next to a rehabilitation facility, but that the City can't turn its back on the problems of those who need help. He stated that Narconon wants to be a positive influence in the community. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the proposed ordinance allows for group Volume 56 -Page 1144 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX homes of seven or more individuals, and the law already allows six or fewer with no restrictions. He stated that he's troubled by some of the comments because the City is providing a mechanism to benefit both the neighbors and the facilities. He stated that recovery homes are not being prohibited. Dr. Linda Orozco stated that she lives 50 feet from the residential treatment center at 1810 West Oceanfront, and noted that they make approximately $250,000 a month at that facility when it is fully occupied. She stated that the State licenses these facilities, but is not concerned about local zoning. The problem in Newport Beach is that the City is not enforcing the existing zoning codes. Ms. Orozco stated that she has a videotape that shows the problems the neighbors have to live with. Additionally, she stated that there is some confusion about the differences between group living facilities and residential treatment centers. Group living facilities do not offer treatment. The residential treatment centers are part of a multimillion dollar business. In closing, she asked the City to conduct some type of enforcement and to view her videotape. Jan Tyler stated that she runs an alcohol and drug rehabilitation program in Costa Mesa, and that women from Newport Beach are served by her facility. She expressed her opposition to the proposed ordinance because it would limit the potential for people to get treatment in Newport Beach. Mayor Ridgeway stressed that the proposed ordinance does not limit any type of sober care or treatment facility. Council Member Nichols confirmed with Ms. Tyler that her facility was licensed by the State. Larry Trayhem, Executive Director of Narconon, stated that he is so tired of the way that Narconon has been depicted by some people. He stated that he is not in the business for the money. Narconon saved his life, and Narconon has done everything in its power to make people happy. He stated that Narconon will continue to do what it c:oes. In response to Council Member Bromberg s question, Mr. Trayhem stated that 27 people live at 1810 West Oceanfront. Council Member Bromberg stated that Narconon has not limited the number of people at the facility, as was previously requested of them, yet Gerry Marshall of Narconon has stated that Narconon wants to be a good neighbor. Council Member Bromberg stated that he's concerned about Narconon not making any changes when they said they would and Mr. Trayhem's comments about continuing to run the business as they have. Gerry Marshall explained that Mr. Trayhem is upset with the discrimination aspect of the issue. Mr. Marshall stated that he thought that the previous comments about making changes were about the sober living homes across the alley. Council Member Bromberg stated that he didn't even know those sober living homes existed at the time and that Mr. Marshall specifically stated that he would work to reduce the number of people living at 1810 West Volume 56 - Page 1145 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Oceanfront from 27 to nine to twelve. Mr. Marshall stated that he thought the comments were about the sober living homes, which they did end the lease on, as promised. He stated that this reduced the number of people living in the area by 18. Mr. Marshall noted that that's 18 people that aren't being helped by Narconon's services. Council Member Bromberg stated that being a good neighbor means not misrepresenting oneself. Mr. Marshall stated that whatever they do to improve the situation, people will still be discriminatory and opposed to having people in recovery living next to them. He stated that the proposed ordinance is discriminatory and against the law. City Attorney Burnham stated that the City has worked with Narconon, at their request, over the past three months to evaluate the occupancy levels of the facility. Mr. Marshall confirmed that Narconon has been treated in a fair manner during the process. City Attorney Burnham stated that Narconon also asked for a determination as to whether their facility was a nonconforming use, and received a letter from the Planning Department confirming that they were a nonconforming use. Again, Mr. Marshall confirmed that Narconon was treated in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner. City Attorney Burnham stated that Mr. Trayhem's comments were directed at a member of the public who has a right to speak her mind. City Attorney Burnham reminded everyone that the subject of the item on the agenda at the current meeting is the proposed ordinance, and determining if it accomplishes what is desired by the City Council and complies with Federal and State law. Mr. Marshall stated that he doesn't feel that the City's intention is to be discriminatory, but he's concerned that the discriminatory comments made by the public will influence the City Council. He stated that fighting discrimination is very frustrating. Mayor Ridgeway stated that at the current meeting, no one has articulated how the proposed ordinance discriminates. City Attorney Burnham offered to meet with anyone who still has concerns or questions about the proposed ordinance. Mayor Ridgeway noted that modifications were made to the proposed ordinance, based on previously stated legal issues but that he hasn't heard any at the current meeting, except for those from Mr. Stearman. Mayor Ridgeway felt that the proposed ordinance supports the services offered by such facilities as Narconon and that the City Council would be objective when making its decision. He additionally noted that he has visited the Narconon facility and feels that such things as trash and noise are a problem. Frank McGeoy stated that he owns a business in Newport Beach and is a recovering alcoholic. His goal is to own a recovery home in Newport Beach, but the restrictions in the proposed ordinance wouldn't make it cost effective. He stated that he could make it work with ten residents in a home, but not six or fewer, and noted that he owns homes in Huntington Beach and Anaheim Hills. Mayor Ridgeway agreed that the economics in Newport Beach make it restrictive. Mr. Goldfarb stated that the proposed ordinance does not prohibit group residential facilities from housing more than six Volume 56 - Page 1146 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 IND&S, handicapped individuals. It provides a relatively simple mechanism for someone to get reasonable accommodation, via the Federal exception permit. Council Member Nichols asked Mr. McGeoy if lie has State licenses for his homes in Huntington Beach and Anaheim Hills. Mr. McGeoy stated that they are both sober living homes, which don't require a license. Council Member Nichols confirmed that Mr. McGeoy is receiving money from the homes, so thought he had to have a license. Mr. McGeoy stated that a license is not required because treatment is not offered. It is only a place to live. Mr. Goldfarb confirmed that the State does not require a license for facilities that do not provide services, as defined by the State. Deborah McGaldy stated that she runs an agency that provides staff for treatment centers and its generally accepted that more than six people are required at a facility to make it a social model environment. Ms. McGaldy stated that she understands both sides of the issue. but there are already so many barriers to treatment. She agreed with a previous speaker that it is more economical to have more individuals in a facility and added that those that don't get treated cost all taxpayers. Ms. McGaldy suggested that people who would like more information on recovery and treatment to access the recovery month. gov website. Brett Countryman asked how easy it is to get a Federal exception permit, and what the process is. Secondly, he asked if a State license is required for more than six. And, lastly, he asked for a simple clarification as to why the proposed ordinance is not discriminatory. Mr. Goldfarb responded by stating that a Federal exception permit applies very specific and very objective criteria, which are easy to satisfy and are also contained within the proposed ordinance. He stated that the process is very simple and very straightforward. Mr. Goldfarb stated that the proposed ordinance is not discriminatory because the only groups that get to live together as something other than a single housekeeping unit are persons who have handicaps. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Ridgeway closed the public hearing. Council Member Rosansky confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that in Section 20.91.040(C)(2) and (4), the word "insure" should be changed to "ensure ". Motion by Council Member BromberE to re- introduce Ordinance No. 2004 -16 amending the Zoning Code. as amended to change "300 yards" to "300 feet' in Section 20.03.030; and change the word "insure" to "ensure" in both Sections 20.91.040(C)(2) and (4). and pass to second reading on August 24, 2004, City Attorney Burnham noted another typographical error in Section 20.91.035(C)(3). He stated that "the following" should be removed. Amended motion by Council Member Bromber to include this change in his motion also. Volume 56 - Page 114:7 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX Council Member Bromberg stated that he is making the motion on the basis that counsel has informed the City Council that it is legal, and complies with Federal and State law. City Attorney Burnham suggested that anyone that is interested in attending a meeting to review the ordinance contact his office with available dates and times, and a meeting will be scheduled. The phone number to the City Attorney's office is (949) 644 -3131. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway ?Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams K. PUBLIC COMMENTS • Jim Hildreth referred to the City's website and read from the seventh paragraph on himself. He stated that it doesn't include the reference from Tony Melum that the records were being microfilmed or from Wes Armand that the City did have the records, or the request by himself that the City look into the records that have been lost. • Dolores Otting stated that the amended agreement for Marinapark included a requirement that the market analysis and fiscal impact analysis were supposed to be available for public review at least ten days prior to the public hearing at which the City Council was scheduled to consider certifying the environmental impact report, but that this did not happen. Additionally, she asked who the amended agreement is with. L. ORAL REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Status report — Ad Hoc General Plan Update Committee (GPUC). Assistant City Manager Wood reported that GPUC met on July 26, 2004. and the main agenda item was a discussion on the method to use to analyze the alternative land use scenarios that the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) developed. Status report — Local Coastal Program (LCP) Certification Committee. Mayor Ridgeway announced that the Coastal Commission has deemed the City's application as complete. Status report — Newport Coast Advisory Committee (NCAC). Council Member Nichols reported that at the most recent NCAC meeting, there was a request for a demonstration on how the school loop road would be operated. He stated that Assistant City Manager Kiff is planning to hold a public meeting to address the matter. Status report — Mariners Joint Use Library Ad Hoc Steering Committee. No report. Volume 56 - Page 1148 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 M. N Q Status report - Other Committee Activities. No reports. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AND ORAL STATUS REPORT 16. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR JULY 22, 2004 (contd. from 7/27/04). 17. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR AUGUST 5, 2004. Planning Director Temple reported that of the four items on the Planning Commission agenda for July 22, 2004, only the item approving the minutes was acted on. The other three items were continued. At the meeting of August 5, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the general plan and use permit for the Newport Sports Museum, and a lengthy hearing was held on Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club (BCYC). The BCYC item was continued so that staff could draft the final findings and conditions. The last item on the agenda was a discussion by the Planning Commission on the guiding principles for the general plan update. She stated that staff will provide the City Council with a report on the meeting and the proposed changes. CONTINUED BUSINESS is. NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED EXECUTIVE', COMMITTEE AND APPOINTMENTS THERETO (contd. from 7/27/04). Motion by Mayor Ridgeway to 1) adopt Resolution No. 2004 -74 relating to the Watershed Executive Committee: and 2) appoint Mayor Ridgeway as the representative to the Watershed Executive Committee and Council Member Webb as ls' Alternate and .Assistant City Manager Dave Riff as 2 ^d alternate. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams CURRENT BUSINESS 19, DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE - SEPTEMBER 17 -SEPTEMBER 19, 2004 IN LONG BEACH. Not finding a council member in attendance at the current meeting that would be able to attend the League of California Cities annual conference, Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the item be continued. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to continue the item to August 24, 2004. Volume 56 - Page 1149 INDEX (100 -2004) (100 -2004) (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 20. CITY COUNCIL FORMATION OF A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING AD HOC COMMITTEE. Mayor Ridgeway appointed Council Members Heffernan and Webb to serve on the committee. Motion by Council Member BromberE to 1) adopt Resolution No. 2004 -75 creating a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Ad Hoc Committee to establish a City Council policy addressing residential traffic concerns: 2) confirm Mayor's appointment of Council Members Heffernan and Webb to the Committee; and 3) as a first committee priority, determine if a speed hump demonstration project on Port Provence is warranted. Dolores Otting stated that she understands the concerns of the Skinners and Caustins, as addressed at the Study Session of July 27, 2004. She asked if the meetings of the committee would be open to the public. Council Member Webb stated that it's his understanding that the committee will look at the various reports that have been put together on the subject, and make recommendations on what would be appropriate standards to implement traffic calming measures. When adopted, this would serve as the too] that would be used by the neighborhoods when they request traffic calming measures. Ms. Otting stated that 585,000 has already been spent on a traffic study and that every neighborhood is different. She stated that one solution will not work for every neighborhood, and she couldn't understand why a demonstration project couldn't be done concurrent with the work that will be done by the committee. She expressed her frustration that the Caustin's request wasn't approved. Council Member Bromberg stated that the action presented to the City Council at the current meeting is what staff was directed to do at the Study Session. He expressed his understanding that the Caustin's might want a speed hump installed sooner, but stated that the process doesn't work that way. City Manager Bludau noted that the City Council cannot take action at a Study Session, per its own policy. Mayor Ridgeway added that the Fire Chief spoke at the same meeting in opposition to speed humps. In addition, a survey indicated that the speed on the Caustin's street is at a lower speed than most. Council Member Bromberg disagreed, but stated that the committee will review the matter and make a recommendation. Volume 56 -Page 1150 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 21. FIRE STATION NO. 7 — APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RRM DESIGN GROUP FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES. Motion by Council Member BromberE to 1) approve a Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $363,521 with RRM Design Group, and 2) authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the agreement. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Mayor Ridgeway 'Foes: Nichols Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 22. AGREEMENTS AND FUNDING FOR THE 13ACK BAY SCIENCE CENTER (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE MARINE STUDIES CENTER) ON SHELLMAKER ISLAND. Motion by Council Member Bromber¢ to 1) authorize the City Manager to execute a Cooperative Agreement between the City of Newport Beach, the County of Orange and the Department of Fish and Game that is substantively identical to Exhibit A; 2) authorize the City Manager to execute a Lease between the City of Newport Beach and the County of Orange that is substantively identical to Exhibit B; and 3) authorize the City Manager to execute a Lease between the City of Newport Beach and the Department of Fish and Game that is consistent with Exhibit B and the authority previously granted on June 22, 2004. Council Member Nichols stated that the City is being optimistic about the funding for Back Bay, and that the agreement spends the money that has been received. City Attorney Burnham agreed that the City is being optimistic in terms of funding, but noted that it's an important project. He confirmed that the City has already contributed approximately S500.000 in American Trader Oil Spill settlement funds that were earmarked for the project. The City's funding commitment from this point forward would be limited to Beacon Bay lease revenue, which is a funding source that is suited for the Back Bay Science Center. In response to Council Member Nichols' question, City Attorney Burnham stated that potentially $300,000 will be spent from the Beacon Bay lease revenue, if the City receives $4 million from other sources. He noted that approximately $2 million has already been identified, and that funding applications are pending. In response to Mayor Ridgeway's question, City Attorney Burnham Volume 56 - Page 1151 INDEX: C -3626 Fire Station No. 7 (38/100-2004) C -3460 Back Bay Science Center on Shel.maker Island (3S /100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX stated that there is approximately $196,000 in the Beacon Bay lease revenue fund. Additionally, there's the ability to borrow against the fund, and confirmed that it is also known as the Land Bank Fund. The Newport Bay Restoration Fund is a separate fund that may be another possible source. City Manager Bludau noted that it has approximately $300,000. City Attorney Burnham noted that there is a minor correction to the cooperative agreement. He specified that the total contribution from the University of California at Irvine (UCI) should be $281,000. Amended motion by Council Member Bromber¢ to include this change to the cooperative agreement in his motion. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: Nichols Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams P. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Ridgeway announced that public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar would be limited to one minute at the current meeting. 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 13, 2004 AND ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 19, 2004 (contd. from 7/27/04). Jim Hildreth stated that on page 1071, his comments are not recorded correctly. Motion by Council Member Brombern to waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan. Adams 2. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 27, 2004. Jim Hildreth stated that on page 1095, it was the Little Balboa Island undergrounding that he was referring to, not the Balboa Island undergrounding. On page 1122, the noise that occurred while he spoke should have been recorded in the minutes. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to waive reading of subject Volume 56 -Page 1152 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 minutes, approve as written and order filed. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 7. REQUEST FOR FUNDING FOR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 94 (PACIFIC DRIVE) (contd. from 7/27/04). Jim Hildreth stated that he hopes that the vault system for this undergrounding will be better than the one for Little Balboa Island. Additionally, he stated that the cost of the district should include accommodations to the residents in the area and those that may not be able to afford it. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to approve a budget amendment (05BA -002) authorizing an advance from the General Fund in the amount of $18,060 to Assessment District No. 94 and appropriate $11,260 to 74094 -9810 for SCE electric design and S6,800 to 74094 -9511 for SBC phone design. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 8. REQUEST FOR FUNDING FOR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 95 (AREA BOUNDED BY L STREET, BALBOA BOULEVARD, CHANNEI. ROAD AND OCEAN BOULEVARD) (contd. from 7 /27/04). Jim Hildreth stated that noise is a major concern and hopefully the vault system will be silenced. Additionally, he hope3 that those that can't afford the assessment will be given the opportunity for financial assistance. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to approve a budget amendment (05BA -005) authorizing an advance from the General Fund in the amount of $105,500 to Assessment District No. 95 and appropriate $80,500 to 74095 -9810 for SCE electric design and $25,000 to 74095 -9811 for SBC phone design. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Volume 56 - Page 1153 INDEX Assessment District No. 94 (89 /100 -2004) Assessment District No. 95 (89/100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams 12. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING CITY ATTORNEY EFFECTIVE AUGUST 14, 2004. Jim Hildreth stated that enough notice was given of the City Attorney's retirement that a replacement should have been found, but that possibly the Assistant City Attorney is qualified to fill the position. Motion by Council Member Bromberg to appoint Assistant City Attorney Robin Clauson to be Acting City Attorney until the position is filled. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Heffernan, Adams Q. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None Mayor Ridgeway and the other council members acknowledged the contributions of City Attorney Burnham. R. ADJOURNMENT - at 10:10 p.m The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on August 4, 2004, at 4:30 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 1154 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes August 10, 2004 INDEX THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY. Volume 56 - Page 1155