HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - Non-Agenda Item - Written CommentsReceived After Agenda Printed
February 24, 2015
Non - Agenda Item
City of Newport Beach re. Fire rings- February 20,2015
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO CITY COUNCIL AND ENTER INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD
AS A NON - AGENDA ITEM IN PUBLIC COMMENTS AT FEBRUARY 24, 2015
COUNCIL SESSION AND IN THE RECORD IN CONNECTION WITH FIRE RINGS
Mayor Selich and Members of the City Council:
This letter pertains to the City's process in connection with the Fire rings issue.
Improper Findings of CEQA Exemption -
We were surprised to learn that the City, on January 15, 2015, certified a Finding
that the Fire rings "project" was exempt from CEQA . We object to the statements
made in the filing that the Fire rings activity is, "ministerial ", and merely
"repairs, restoration ". Where is the analysis that supports this conclusion?
2. Assertion of Fire rings plans without adequate Due Process or Environmental
Review-
The City has asserted plans to regulatory agencies(esp. Coastal Commission)
on January 29,2015 that include new site locations which have had no Fire
rings.These new locations will generate multiple, adverse environmental impacts
in extended, new areas of our coastline, and subject both residents and visitors
who visit the beach to involuntary, persistent exposure to hazardous air
emissions and contaminated water - - -not to mention other nuisance,public safety,
and traffic impacts.
There is no evidence of any environmental review that was performed to arrive at
such a conclusion; or, that analysis and findings were ratified by the City Council.
There was no process completed by which the public was fully noticed, and had
the opportunity to provide input, concerning the various 7 "Alternatives"
constructed by the City and submitted to the Coastal Commission for review. In
fact, the Alternative that was stated to be that "Preferred by the City Council"
contained elements to which a number of community members objected.
Any and all of the plans which introduce new sites, or material modification of
existing ones, and the Fire rings project en toto, should be subject to
Environmental Review, and are properly not exempt from CEQA requirements.
To rely on an On -line survey which only a fraction of the City's population has
been made aware of, and to which many citizens do not have access to, as
fulfillment of Public Notice and Public process is unsatisfactory.
It was poor judgement at best to submit the January 29th letter introducing but not
providing diligent menu of options or evaluation.
We request that the City Council immediately move and act to:
a) Rescind the Motion which was based on non - compliant process that stated the
City's position regarding a Fire ring plan to be, "Final ", rather than, "Interim. Move
to reestablish the current plan as, "Interim ".
b) Immediately structure and restore a legitimate public process, that, at minimum,
includes:
1. Study Session to evaluate alternative plans and their impacts, and their
attractiveness and feasibility to meet resident and visitor community need
.The session should explore all aspects of the Fire ring issue, including
location of rings, enforcement of night curfews and nuisance,and other items.
2. Fully Noticed 1 -2 Public Hearings so that the public can provide input and be
made aware of developments
3. Engage in the selection of a limited menu of plans(est. 3), based on public
input and rigorous environmental review pursuant to CEQA parameters.
4. City Council to make a determination as to a preferred and contingent plan
that fulfill Air Quality requirements, and do not increase or extend adverse
impacts on coastal residents or visitors /users.The community does not wish
to be at odds with the AQMD, as we believe that air quality regulation is well -
established and in the best interests of the public.
c) Retain an experienced Environmental attorney /consultant to advocate and
negotiate on our City's behalf with the regulatory agencies,esp. CCC- the
outcome of this issue will have significant impact on the environmental health
and safety, and attractiveness of Newport's beaches for years to come.
Our pristine beaches are the cornerstone of Newport's value and reputation as a
unique and desirable place to live and visit.
The residents have indicated their willingness to accept a compromise including the
reinstatement of some wood - burning Fire rings - -- within the same boundary footprint as
that of historical locations, and in number and position compliant with AQMD
regulations. We are confident that this is a fair and reasonable platform for negotiation
and resolution of this matter.
We respectfully remind the Council that the People have spoken —and that we are
expecting the Council to listen, and act accordingly .Thank you.
Denys Oberman
Kathryn Branman
Linda Klein
Cindy Koller
Cc: Brian Park, Drew Wetherholt, Joe Reiss, Central Balboa Penninsula Community
Asociation, West Newport Communciation Association, Corona del Mar Community
Association, SPON