HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/14/1986 - Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
n0 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
¢ PLACE: Council Chambers
one A rwi TIME: 7:30 P.M.
DATE: July 14, 1986
MINUTES
- -
t
Present
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
A. ROLL CALL.
Motion
x
B. The reading of the Minutes of the
All Ayes
Meeting of June 23, 1986, was waived,
approved as written, and ordered filed.
on
x
C. The reading in full of all ordinances
All Ayes
and resolutions under consideration was
waived, and the City Clerk was directed
to read by titles only.
D. HEARINGS:
1. Mayor Maurer opened the continued public
hearing regarding:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -1(B) - Requesl
initiated by the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
to amend the Land Use, Circulation, and
Recreation and Open Space Elements of
the Newport Beach General Plan, so as tc
allow construction of an additional
1,275,000 sq. ft. of office uses,
248,000 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant
uses, and 700 residential units on
property located in Newport Center and
various peripheral sites. Also propose;
is a revision to the Circulation System
Master Plan. to delete the
Avocado - MacArthur one - way - couplet
and establish MacArthur Boulevard as a
two -way major arterial roadway; and the
acceptance of an Environmental Document
AND
AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH LOCAL. COASTAL PROGRAM, LAND USE
PLAN - Request to amend the Certified
Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan,
for the Newporter North, Bayview
Landing, and Pacific Coast
Highway /Jamboree Road sites;
AND
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86 -2(A) - A
request initiated by the CITY to amend
the CIRCULATION ELEMENT of the NEWPORT
BEACH GENERAL PLAN so as to redesignate
MacArthur Boulevard northerly of Ford
Road.
Report from the Planning Department, wa
presented.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, a letter was
received from the Harbor View Hills
Community Association regarding the
wording of the Planning Commission's
Volume 40 - Page 253
S
'PA 85 -1(B)
(45)
/LUP
;PA 86 -2(A)
(45)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
®LL ®L Gad July 14, 1986
MINUTES
ounce
resolution for MacArthur Boulevard. In
CPA 85 -1(B)/
addition, a. letter was received from
86 -2(A)
LuVena Hayton, recommending approval of
the proposed General Plan Amendment.
•
The City Manager referred to the subject
staff report and noted that the staff
had responded to the concerns raised by
the Council. at the June 23 meeting, as
enumerated in said report.
At the request of Council Member Cox,
Roger Seitz, Vice President of Planning
and Urban Design of The Irvine Company,
explained the details of the proposed
landscape plan for MacArthur Boulevard
from the major future interchange with
San Joaquin Hills Transportation
Corridor and San Diego Creek to Pacific
Coast Highway.
The following persons addressed the
Council regading the proposed General
Plan Amendment:
Donald Christensen, Chairman of
Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce
Traffic Commission, stated that
they strongly support the project;
•
however, they are concerned with
traffic, and therefore, are
preparing a proposal for
consideration by the City Council
regarding the feasibility of car
pooling, etc., in order to save car
trips. He also stated that he,
personally, was in favor of the
proposed landscape program just
presented for MacArthur Boulevard.
Jean Watt, #4 Harbor Island,
representing SPON, read a prepared
statement, (which was also
submitted for the record)
summarizing their overriding
concerns, i.e., levels of traffic
service, effect of Pacific Coast
Highway on the community character,
and the proposed development
agreement.
Mrs. Watt also submitted a copy of
a letter to Patricia Temple,
Environmental Coordinator, dated
July 11, 1986, from Terry Watt,
Urban Planner with Shute, Mihaly &
•
Weinberger, Attorneys at Law,
regarding adequacy of response to
comments on the Environmental
Impact Report for Newport Center
and Peripheral Sites. In addition,
Volume 40 - Page 254
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\CAL ROLL yF9 July 14, 1986 INDEX
a copy of the Transportation GPA 85 -1(B)/
Systems Management Ordinance for 86 -2(A)
the City of Pleasanton, was also
submitted for Council review.
•
Lowell. Martindale, 649 Promontory
Drive East, partner in the law firm
of O'Melveny & Myers, Fashion
Island, stated he felt that careful
planning had been given to this
project by The Irvine Company and
would urge its approval.
Ralph Rodheim, President of Newport
Harbor Chamber of Commerce, stated
he felt the project would improve
the quality of life in the City.
He was especially favorable of the
proposed Teen Center.
Shirley Conger, 3033 Bayside Drive,
stated that at the June 23 City
Council meeting, there was a
"crying" need for office space
expressed on the part of The Irvine
Company. However, in the July 3
issue of the Los Angeles Times, it
was noted that The Irvine Company
was "cutting back" on its employees
by 30% due to a 1/3 vacancy rate in
office space near John Wayne
•
Airport. She stated she had
problems reconciling these two
statements. She also stated that
she did not want to see Newport
Center built up to the point where
it overwhelms Corona del Mar
as a result of the increased
traffic.
Philip Sansone, 215 Marguerite
Avenue, stated he felt that the
public was not adequately made
aware of this proposal and its
importance, and therefore,
suggested:
1) The City Council defer
action on the project;
2) Disseminate details of this
proposal, good and bad, to all
residents utilizing cable
television, utility bill
inserts and public forum; and
•
3) Leave the final decision of
the project to the electorate
and place on the November
ballot.
Volume 40 - Page 255
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL
ROLL ?i 99 �G� 9G�
��A �� y�9 July 14, 1986
MINUTES
IL] r%w v
Bob McCaffrey, 409 N. Bay Front,
GPA 85 -1(B)/
stated he felt the proposal was a
86 -2(A)
very good plan and would expand the
tax base. However, he was not
supportive of the proposed
•
pedestrian and bicycle bridge over
MacArthur Boulevard between San
Miguel Drive and Coast Highway.
Gary Pomeroy, 2907 Ebbtide Road,
President of Harbor View Hills
Community Association, referred to
their letter of July 7, 1986, which
he read into the record regarding
MacArthur Boulevard between Coast
Highway and San Miguel and their
desire that MacArthur Boulevard
remain four lanes at this location.
He stated they felt the wording in
the Planning Commission's
resolution was in error and
requested the oversight be
corrected with the revised language
as set forth in their letter. He
also stated their Association has
not had time to discuss thoroughly
the proposed foot bridge and would'
request the City Council withhold
its approval at this time.
•
Debbie Allen, 1021 White Sails Way,
referred to her prepared statement
dated .July 8, 1986, which had been
distributed to the City Council
just prior to the meeting regarding
widening of MacArthur Boulevard and
deletion of the one -way couplet.
She stated that the resolution
adopted by the Planning Commission
on this issue reflects an
acceptable compromise of the
divergent interests in this item,
and she would urge its approval
with the following clarifications:
1) Refer to the June 23 staff
report, pages 25 and 26, which
explain the intent of the
Commission to apply the
conditions for the widening of
MacArthur Boulevard to the
entire section of the roadway
from Pacific Coast Highway to
San Miguel Road (subject only
to permitting the necessary
•
additional lanes at the
intersections). This Intent
paragraph was inserted by the
-
Commission to explain and
correct the meaning of the
Volume 40 - Page 256
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CALROLL
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
resolution ; and
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
2) Refer to the letter from
the Harbor View Hills
Community Association of July
7, 1986, which explains the
Association's position that
Pelican Hill Road be completed
from Pacific Coast Highway to
Bonita Canyon Road, before
MacArthur is widened. This
condition is vital to all of
Corona del Mar, because they
want to route the through
traffic around all of Corona
del Mar, before additional
traffic is allowed to use
Pacific Coast Highway up
MacArthur as the access road
from downcoast to the Airport
area.
Bill Ritter, 410 Aliso Avenue,
stated he was in support of the
General Plan Amendment as he felt
it would enhance the City's
financial position and also
recognize the responsible efforts
on the part of The Irvine Company.
Jean Morris, 1032 Sea Lane, stated
•
the Harbor View Hills Community
Association, unanimously supports
the Planning Commission's
recommendation to have MacArthur
Boulevard remain at four lanes, at
least temporarily. She stated that
they originally supported the
General Plan Amendment with certain
conditions. She stated that they
would like the mitigating
circumstances for MacArthur
Boulevard to be completed prior to
any building. It was also their
understanding that Pelican Hill
Road would be constructed prior to
any additions to Newport Center,
and not just "tacked" on the end as
it is now being proposed. She
referred to Page 8 and 9 of the
staff report regarding traffic
generation on MacArthur Boulevard
and expressed her concerns. In
conclusion, she requested the
Council take separate votes on the
following five items:
Volume 40 - Page 257
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\CAL ROLL Gtr F9 y�9 July 14, 1986 INDEX
1) Should Pelican Hill Road be
GPA 85 -1(B)/
in place before large segments
86 -2(A)
of the Center are built;
2) Should sounds and sight and
other mitigating environmental
concerns for MacArthur be done
by the applicants before
permits be given for building
in the Center;
3) Should nothing be done to
improve MacArthur until
Newport Village is started
which may or may not be a long
way down the road;
4) Should Newport Village be
allowed a density of 30 units
to the acre (Park Newport
being 24 units per acre) which
with the height limitations,
would appear about two times
as thick as Park Newport;
5) What actual figure would
the Council use as a criteria
as to the cars MacArthur
Boulevard could carry as a
four lane road?
•
In response to Ms. Morris's comments
with regard to Page 8 and 9 of the staff
report, the Environmental Coordinator
stated that: the two charts on Page 8
indicate estimated volume to capacity
ratios along MacArthur Boulevard. Both
of these charts assume completion of the
regional roadway system, including the
completion of Pelican Hill Road to its
full master plan capacity, and the
completion of the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor. The chart on
Page 9 was provided for additional
information for the City Council, and
was included to show what the
anticipated volumes would be in the
event the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor was not
constructed.
In response to Council Member Heather
regarding the proposal to delete the
Avocado - MacArthur one -way couplet, the
Public Works Director stated that the
detailed discussion of MacArthur
Boulevard, its projected traffic and the
•
function it will serve, are contained on
pages 7 to 10 of the staff report. The
most fundamental consideration is that
the data does show that the master plan
Volume 40 - Page 258
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL\<� ROLL July 14, 1986
MINUTES
lLlr%c v
for MacArthur Boulevard needs to be six
GPA 85 -1(B)/
lanes for it to function satisfactorily.
86 -2(A)
It's important, from a circulation point
of view, that that capacity be
available; the major intersections not
.
be unduly congested, and the traffic not
bypass onto local streets.
The Public Works Director stated that
the configuration that is shown on the
exhibit depicts the phasing proposal
that has been made for construction of
MacArthur Boulevard to an ultimate
six -lane right -of -way. He feels it is a
workable plan, and as long as adequate
guarantees are in place to insure that
it is constructed to six lanes when the
need arises, he thinks it will function
satisfactorily.
Jean Harrington, 2007 Highland
Drive, member of Mariners Community
Association, stated that she was
supportive of many elements
proposed in the General Plan
Amendment; however, she was
concerned regarding density. She
felt that with the build -out of
Newport Center, it will be
•
difficult to justify to the County
Board of Supervisors, the City's
desire to maintain a certain number
of flights out of John Wayne
Airport.
John Miller, resident, (no address
given) stated that there are many
benefits to be derived from the
subject proposal, but are these
benefits worth the cost of
approximately 200,000 cars per day
in the City.
Patty Frey, 516'g Marguerite, spoke
in support of affordable housing in
the City for the "young
professionals" so that they do not
have to relocate outside the City.
Carrie Slayback, 426 Riverside
Avenue, spoke in support of
preserving open space in the City,
and suggested consideration be
given to developing a large park
area at Jamboree and Pacific Coast
Highway. She would also like to
•
see more greenbelt areas around the
perimeters of Back Bay.
Volume 40 - Page 259
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CALRQLL 99 �G� 9G,9 99� �9� CAF
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
Don Regan, 924 W. Oceanfront
GPA 85 -1(B)/
Avenue, owner of building in
86 -2(A)
Corporate Plaza in Newport Center,
indicated he was in favor of the
General Plan Amendment. He stated
•
it was not economical for a
developer to provide open space,
and he also felt that traffic was a
nonissue. He stated he lives on
the Peninsula, and therefore, copes
with the traffic on a daily basis,
but realizes the problem is being
worked on and accepts it. He also
stated he was very pleased with the
proposed bicycle trail plan
included in this proposal.
Jim Wood, 125 Abalone Avenue,
stated he was not opposed to the
General Plan Amendment; however, he
did feel the Pelican Hill
connection should be included in
the plan. He also felt the Council
should consider, not only the
quantity of life in the community,
but the quality of life as well,
such as the proposed Cultural
Center, which he felt should have a
larger seating capacity than what
is being proposed. He stated he
felt the community needs more
•
places for interaction socially,
and the proposed build -out provides
that opportunity with the proposed
Teen Center, Health Club, etc.
John Gardner, 1924 Holiday Road,
spoke in opposition to the proposed
General Plan Amendment. He
expressed his conserns with regard
to increased traffic, and how he
values "lack of crowds."
John K.illefer, 161 Shorecliff Road,
spoke in support of the project and
stated he favors a good solid tax
base, and the impact Pelican Hill
Road will have on Corona del Mar.
He recommended the City Council
approve the General Plan Amendment.
Barbara Young, 2611 Vista Drive,
stated. that she was against the
original proposal for expansion of
Newport Center, but now favors the
project, inasmuch as what it has to
•
offer to the entire community.
Volume 40 - Page 260
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL s 0 4i S ti v
ROLL
Gtr July 14, 1986
MINUTES
IT:D70:i
Tom Nielsen, President of The
GPA 85 -1(B)/
Irvine Company, stated that now is
86 -2(A)
the time to finalize the plan for
Newport Center, which has been a
long- standing issue for lie years;
•
and which is consistent with the
plan that was set forth some 20
years ago. It's a mixed use plan
which involves a broad variety of
uses that may be somewhat different
than one that was envisioned by
other communities. This project
also resolves some of those
long- standing issues, establishes
mutual commitments on the part of
The Irvine Company, as well as the
City, and hopefully, will bring the
business and residential community
together on a set of mutual
objectives.
Mr. Nielsen stated that as a result
of many meetings with the various
homeowner associations, the
Planning Commission, and staff,
their plan has been modified and
now incorporates cultural and
community opportunities for a new
library, expanded art museum,
community meeting facility, fitness
center, teen center, etc. They
•
feel the plan responds to the needs
of the community, which also
includes additional housing
opportunities. 'It also revitalizes
the retail heart of Newport Center,
as well as provides office
opportunities. It also involves a
substantial commitment to
transportation improvements, which
are in excess to the needs
identified in the Environmental
Document. It includes a lowering
and moving of an existing four -lane
highway away from an adjacent
residential community, and
landscaping that area extensively.
Pelican Hill Road and the benefit
it will bring to the whole of
Corona. del Mar from Pacific Coast
Highway to Bonita Canyon Road,
widening of Jamboree Road, and
other significant transportation
improvements are also included in
the plan. All of the commitments
on the part of The Irvine Company,
as well as the City, will be
•
finalized in the Development
Agreement. In summary; they feel
Volume 40 - Page 261
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL
ROLL
Gdf CFA �� y�9 July 14, 1986 ,
MINUTES
INDEX
their plan represents a fair
GPA 85 -1(B)/
balance between the public interest
86 -2(A)
and their private interest, and
therefore, recommend its approval.
•
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hart regarding
Bayview Landing and the proposed
Teen Center, Mr. Nielsen stated
that they have discussed a plan
with the staff that would envision
additional square footage over the
recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and would involve a use
of portion of the top of the
Bayview Landing site. With regard
to overall office space, he stated
that the office space proposed by
the Planning Commission is
approximately 30% less than what
was envisioned when they submitted
their plan; a lot of which was lost
during the Newport Village
conversion site to residential.
They are hopeful the Bayview site
can be looked at in the context of
something that is now before us in
terms of an opportunity to use that
site to retain a view park, and
retain the kind of essential
characteristic they understand is
•
necessary there. One of the unique
aspects of Newport Center is that
there is a market for office space
in Newport Center as compared to
the airport area.
Council Member Strauss stated that prior
to considering the Check List for this
project, he would like to read into the
record the following statement:
"I will be straw - voting
individually on the many proposals
within the General Plan
Amendment - -I'll comment on them at
the appropriate times, but I
believe a framework and overall
view is necessary to put the
individual items in perspective.
First, there are some very good
possibilities in the General Plan
Amendment:
"Possibility of a bigger
Central Library (important
•
plus which I support);
"Possibility of an expanded
Art Museum (world class
international recognition);
Volume. 40 - Page 262
®UNCIU MEMBERS
c\ q^G���y�G���,p\
9 \
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
"Possibility of a Teen Center
(vital need of the City,
etc,); and
"Possibility of a Child Care
Center (valuable to working
mothers).
"There are certainly other aspects
to the. General Plan Amendment that
are pluses. Please note in each
case the word 'Possibility.' A
general plan is not a commitment.
It simply is a plan. If these
things happen to the extent they
do, it will be, indeed, excellent.
Unfortunately, however, there are
three major shortcomings in CPA
85 -1(B), which obliges me to oppose
it, at least as now presented.
"First and foremost, is the
proposal to add 1,275,000 sq. ft.
of commercial office high rise
buildings to a city and region
already suffocating from traffic
congestion. How big is 1,275,000
sq. ft:., a neighbor asked me, and
as a comparison I looked at the
Bank of America building on Via
Lido /Newport Boulevard. It is an
average bank with approximately
•
10,000 sq. ft. Now, envision 127
buildings that size and with the
traffic it would bring. With
respect to buildings and traffic,
let me! read from the Los Angeles
Times of July 8, where it
references a local "glut" of
high -rise office buildings, 'the
article states that the company has
temporarily stopped the
construction of additional office
buildings because of soaring
vacancy rates in the commercial
district near John Wayne Airport,
which has been the site of a
high -rise building boom. There is
a 33% tenant vacancy rate near the
airport- -the highest rate in Orange
County -- according to the real
estate firm of Coldwell Banker.'
"It is important to compare our
overbuilt office with underbuilt
rental housing for people to live
•
in. A report last month from the
Planning Department shows a vacancy
rate for rental housing as under
2 %! Compare that with a vacancy
rate of over 30% in offices near
the airport. We're a City out of
Volume 40 - Page 263
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
COUNCIL MEMBERS
d o 3 s ti v
O� �9 CGS yG.p 9 c"9� CAF
GJ,, 3F� Fp A,,p July 14, 1986
MLCAL
MINUTES
INDEX
balance. A City that doesn't need
GPA 85 -1(B)/
more commercial office space!
86 -2(A)
Note, too, that our neighboring
Cities of Irvine and Costa Mesa are
finally saying 'no, or go slow,' to
the overdevelopment that is
•
swamping their roads.
"Let me quote you a Daily Pilot
editorial of June 26, where the
plan talks about the 'Costa Mesa
Planning Commission which has
proposed a freeze on virtually all
new development in north Costa
Mesa. The plan would allow new
buildings to be constructed only to
the degree that the streets could
accommodate the additional traffic
the projects would generate. Since
many streets in or adjoining prime
development areas already are
considered crowded -- including the
freeways - -the moratorium would mean
the end of several controversial
proposals. The message is clear:
The general public is increasingly
agitated about clogged streets and
will express that displeasure in
opposition to development projects
that ignore the problem. It is
traffic and all its ramifications--
frustrating jams, noise and
•
pollution - -that will shape the
future development of the
urbanized Orange Coast.'
"That's Costa Mesa. Most of you
are familiar with the City of
Irvine: where the recent Council
election had the same message - -slow
down! We may all go under with
traffic. Have you tried getting
from Newport Boulevard to the I -5
between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m.? It's
tough and you can hardly get there.
"My second point is that the
proposal does not, in my judgment,
have an adequate Environmental
Impact: Report. Note that for the
first time ever, and certainly in
my eight years on the City Council,
that a citizens committee in our
City has stated that an EIR is
inadequate and recommends it not be
certified! They outline seven
reasons for their conclusion.
Please note, also, that this
Council's own. Citizens Advisory
Committee is recommending not only
that the EIR not be certified, but
that the project itself be denied!
Volume 40 - Page 264
COUNCIL -MEMBERS
CO
v� �
��F
July 14; 1986
MINUTES
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
Further, the manner in which the
City's Planning Commission handled
the EIR is a bit worrisome. The
Planning Commission, in a divided
vote, closed its hearing and voted
•
before the end of the period
provided by law for comments on the
EIR. This is a strange thing to do
and I believe it is highly
improper - -I can't figure out why
they would do it.
"My final comments relate to a deep
concern about the Planning
Commission Development Agreement.
We are told on Page 43 of the staff
report that such an agreement will
follow 'later on.' Development
Agreements have their detractions
and I think one of the responders
to the EIR, (law firm of Shute.
Mihaly and Weinberger) has stated
it better than I can.
'The basic defect of a
Development Agreement: We
seriously question whether the
public will benefit from the
proposed Development Agreement
or whether the benefit rests
only with the applicant.
Binding future planning
commissions and city councils
to a massive development plan
when future circumstances may
be drastically different,
seems unwise and may well
prove to be unconstitutional.'
"I am not a lawyer and so I don't
know that much about the
constitutionality of it because
conditions do change, but I
wouldn't want to take away from
future city councils and planning
commissions the right to decide
what's good for the City. I
sincerely hope you will also agree
and will reject the idea of a
Development Agreement.
"In closing, several people have
indicated that finances and the tax
base are important, and they are,
but they should not determine the
character of the City. The City is
in an excellent financial position,
not only for 1986, but also 10
years from now. The City receives,
each year, a 10 -year forecast of
Volume 40 - Page 265
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
o�
July 14, 1986
•
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
I x I x x III
is x x
MINUTES
its financial position and it's
'First Class,' and it will be
solvent: with or without GPA
85 -1(B). So I do not think that
consideration should lead us to the
final conclusion. I believe that
what should lead us, is the
character of the City that we
desire to have."
Mayor Maurer noted that there has been
very little approval given to additional
building, or build -out, in the City
during the last six years, but in these
six years, traffic has increased at an
alarming rate. He stated that the
Council is concerned with the traffic
problem and is attempting to do what it
can to alleviate the conjestion. The
City Council is also aware that it is
the entire County that is bringing
traffic through the City, and around it,
and it's not just new building within
the City that is causing this problem.
If the City were to place a moratorium
on new development as was recommended in
the City of Costa Mesa, there are
property rights that would be affected.
In addition, traffic would still
increase.
Council Member Heather stated that this
is a very complex and involved project,
and she felt that all the Council
Members would agree that Patricia
Temple, Environmental Coordinator, has
done an outstanding professional job
with regard to this project, and
deserves the Council's utmost
appreciation.
At this time, the City Council
straw - voted. the items shown on the Check
List of the staff report:
LAND USE ELEMENT:
x Fashion Island: Add 188,000 sq.
ft. for general and retail
commercial uses and 2,500 theatre
seats,. Total allowed development
in Fashion Island is 1,429,250 sq.
ft. and 2,500 theatre seats.
x Block 600: Add 300,000 sq. ft. for
X x general office development. Total
allowed development in Block 600 is
1,100,000 sq. ft. and 325 hotel
rooms.
Volume 40 - Page 266
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL. MEMBERS
- �0f s9v o`Gai gG9ti9��ti�9� 9c��
GJ'u, 6'n �A *0 July 14, 1986
Motion x
Ayes x x x x x
Noes x x
•
Motion
Noes Ix I xI I xI I Ayes x x x x x
Motion
Ayes
Noes I x I x I xI xI xIx I x
Pon x
x x x x x x
Noes x
Motion
Ayes Noes I x I xIx Ix Ix Ix Ix
Motion x
Ayes x x x x x x
Abstain x
•
MINUTES
Civic 1?laza Expansion: Add 65,000
sq. ft. for institutional use.
Institutional uses include Art
Museum, Natural History Museum and
Library uses. Total development is
234,706 sq. ft. of office and
113,000 sq. ft. of institutional
uses.
Block 800: Change the land use
designation from "Multi- Family
Residential" to "Administrative,
Professional and Financial
Commercial." Add 440,000 sq. ft.
for office development in Block
800, or a total of 693,100 sq. ft.
in Block 800.
PCH /Jamboree: Change the land use
designation from "Residential and
Marine Commercial" to "Multi- Family
Residential." Add 130 dwelling
units. Also, change the land use
designation for Villa Point (PCH
Frontage) from "Low Density
Residential" to "Multi- Family
Residential," not to exceed 154
dwelling units. The combined sites
are not to exceed 284 dwelling
units.
Corporate Plaza West: Change the
land use designation from "Retail
and Service Commercial with
Alternate Land Use" to
"Administrative, Professional and
Financial Commercial." Add 100,000
sq. ft. for office development for
a total of 123,400 sq. ft.
Newport Village: Change the land
use designation from "Retail and
Service Commercial" to
"Multi.- Family Residential," not to
exceed 560 dwelling units. Add
80,000 sq. ft. to Corporate Plaza,
for a total of 445,200 sq. ft.
80,000 sq. ft. can be constructed
only if for an athletic /health
club.
Avocado /MacArthur: Change the land
use designation from a mixture of
"Low Density Residential" and
"Retail and Service Commercial" to
"Administrative, Professional and
Financial Commercial" and
"Governmental, Educational and
Institutional Facilities." 44,000
sq. ft. of office uses are
Volume 40 - Page 267
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL 9 ®L @ GIPS t"p FA $�� July 14, 1986 ,
MINUTES
INDEX
permitted with a transit facility
GPA 85 -1(B)/
and 15,000 sq. ft. for a day care
86 -2(A)
facility.
Mon
x
Big Change the
x
x
x
x
x
x
land`use designation from
X
"Recreational and Environmental
Open Space10 to "Multi- Family
Residential," allowing a maximum of
80 dwelling units.
BayvieFr Landing:
The City Manager summarized
Alternatives "A." and "C," as set
forth in the staff report.
David Neish, representing The
Irvine Company, addressed the
Council and stated that they concur
with the language set forth in
Alternative "C." He referred to a
site plan of the Bayview property
and stated that they are proposing
four separate restaurant sites. He
explained where each restaurant
would be located and answered
questions of the Council regarding
the sites. The primary access to
the Bayview Landing site would be
off of Back Bay Drive. In
•
addition, they would be proposing a
right -in and right -out only access
off of Jamboree. There would be no
vehicular access off of Pacific
Coast Highway.
Motion
x
Council Member Hart indicated that
she will be supporting the Planning
Commission's recommendation noted
as Alternative "A," inasmuch as
there would be no restaurant on the
upper .Level of the site. She
stated that if building were
allowed on the upper level,
valuable open space would be lost,
which has already been given up in
other portions of this General Plan
Amendment. She stated that "we
don't need a building on every
single lot in this City." She does
not think this is the type of open
space the City can lose, and
therefore, moved to approve the
Planning Commission's
recommendation, changing the square
•
footage from 25,000 to 30,000.
1
I
Volume: 40 - Page 268
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\CAL 9,9 (G�i qG9 q�� t^q� CAF
Gd
ROLL J a' t^Q July 14, 1986 INDEX
Discussion ensued with respect to
GPA 85 -1(B)/
Alternative "C," wherein, Council
86 -2(A)
Members Cox and Agee expressed
Je
x
x
x
their reasons for supporting it.
The motion made by Council Member
Noes
x
x
x
x
Hart was voted on and FAILED.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
Alternative "C."
Motion
x
Substitute motion was made to
Ayes
x
x
x
x
approve Alternative "C" with the
Noes
x
language to read as follows:
Abstain
x
x
Change the land use designation of
the lower portion of the site from
"Recreational Open Space with an
alternate use of Low Density
Residential" to "Retail and Service
Commercial." Change the land use
designation of the upper portion of
the site from "Recreational and
Environmental Open Space" to a
mixture of "Recreational and
Environmental Open Space and Retail
and Service Commercial," Allow
32,000 sq. ft. for restaurant or
visitor serving commercial use;
four restaurant facilities may be
constructed, with the intent that
•
one will be used as a Teen Center.
All access for commercial use shall
be subject to the review and
approval of the Planning and Public
Works Departments. Existing public
views from and across the site
shall be preserved and maximized
through grading of the site during
construction of commercial uses.
The upper portion of the site shall
be used for public park and view
area; and may be used for
restaurant uses and related parking
so long as any building on the
upper level is set down as low as
possible and located close to
Jamboree Road to maximize views.
The public park and view area shall
be developed at the cost of The
Irvine. Company at the time of site
development in a manner acceptable
to the Parks, Beaches and
Recreation Commission and the City
Council.
Volume 40 - Page 269
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL A sR ®LL
Motion
Ayes
Noes
•
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
1 on
Ayes
Noes
Abstain
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
on
Ay
�
Ayes
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
I
r
ie
ig
.n
zg
in
a
to
x
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
x
Newporter North: Change the land
x
x
x
x
x
x
use designation from "Low Density
x.
Residential" to "Multi- Family
Residential" with a maximum of 491
dwelling units. Significant
cultural resources which exist on
the site shall be preserved in a
manner acceptable to the City, wit
development clustered in other
areas of the site. A Natural
History Museum may be accommodate(
on this site.
x
Westbay: Change the land use
designation from "Low Density
Residential" to "Recreational and
Environmental Open Space" in
partial consideration for increase
development in Newport Center and
on the peripheral sites.
x
San Diego Creek North: Add a 2.5
acre Fire Station reservation to
the site. The reservation shall 1
in effect for a period of five
years. The land reserved shall b
dedicated to the City of Newport
Beach if the reservation is
exercised within a period of five
years.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
x
Bayview Landing: Maintain existk
x
x
x
x
language in the Recreation and Op
X
x
Space Element, which allows some
x
development to occur on the upper
level of the site.
x
Newpox-ter North: Maintain existi
"Recreational and Environmental
Open 'apace" designation, but add
unmapped environmentally sensitiv
area for preservation of
significant onsite cultural
resources.
x
Westb:g: Designate the site for
regional park facilities with
unmapped environmentally sensitiv
areas and public access where
appropriate. A natural history
facility may be allowed on the si
subject to approval of the City.
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
x
Item No. 1, Alternative "A" -
Delete Avocado Avenue /MacArthur
Boulevard Primary Couplet
designation; designate MacArthur
Boulevard as a Major Arterial (sl
i
Volume 40 - Page 270
MINUTES
I
r
ie
ig
.n
zg
in
a
to
x
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
F
July 14, 1986 oS
ROLL o p INDEX
lanes, divided); designate Avocado
Avenue as a Secondary Arterial
(four lanes) between Coast Highway
and San Miguel Drive. This
circulation element revision is
subject to approval of the County
of Orange.
Discussion ensued with regard to
Item No. 2 of Alternative "A,"
wherein the City Manager advised
that a letter from the City of
Irvine was received this date
regarding the subject proposed
General Plan change, and notifying
the Environmental Coordinator that,
"because our General Plan link does
not designate the number of lanes,
we have determined that the
proposal is consistent with our
General Plan, and therefore no
comments are necessary."
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hart, the
Environmental Coordinator stated
that the traffic projects, which
were used, included all of the
development in the City of Irvine,
and as such, any development which
would occur across the street would
•
be accounted for within the traffic
numbers. Additionally, for most of
this link, MacArthur Boulevard is
in what is commonly referred to as
the "spaghetti bowl" inasmuch as it
is in the midst of the interchange
of the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor, and for a
good portion of that road there
will riot be immediately adjacent
land uses.
Motion
x
Following consideration, motion was
All Ayes
made to approve Item No. 2 of
Alternative "A1t to add an
additional arterial highway
designation to the Circulation
Element, as follows: Major
Modified: eight lanes, divided.
Reclassify the portion of MacArthur
Boulevard between Ford Road and
State Route 73 as a "Major- Modified
Arterial; eight lanes, divided.
This circulation element revision
subject to approval of the
County of Orange and the City of
Irvine.
Volume 40 - Page 271
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
c s .o si s S v
a¢
r A July 14 , 1986
Motion
•
Motion
•
•
x
X
San Joaquin Hills Road East of
Spyglass Hill Road:
MINUTES
Council Member Hart stated she was
in support of Alternative "C," and
would move its approval with the
language changed to read as
follows: Initiate an amendment to
the Circulation Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan to
designate San Joaquin Hills Road
easterly of Spyglass Hill to
Pelican Hill Road as a Primary
Arterial, four lanes divided. This
Circulation Element revision is
subject to approval of the County
of Orange.
Substitute motion was made to
approve the Planning Commission's
recommendation noted as Alternative
"A," which reads as follows: Not
recommended for General Plan
Amendment initiation.
Council Member Cox stated that he
made the substitute motion because
he does not feel the Council has
seen the kind of studies needed to
evaluate this item and do a General
Plan Amendment. He also feels
gix -lane arterial roads are an
important ingredient in our
community to improve the traffic
circulation.
Discussion ensued with regard to
Resolution No. 85 -11, adopted
February 25, 1985, expressing the
City's position on the San Joaquin
Hills Transportation Corridor,
wherein the City Manager noted that
one of the Council's concerns was
that "The connection of San Joaquin
Hills Road to Pelican Hill Road
shall not occur until Pelican Hill
Road is fully operational. San
Joaquin Hills Road should not
exceed four travel lanes as it
connects to Pelican Hill Road. The
extension of San Joaquin Hills Road
east of Pelican Hill Road to the
Corridor shall not occur." It was
felt by the City Manager that this
resolution was consistent with
Alternative "C." He also felt that
the recommendation of the Planning
Commission would maintain the
classification at six lanes.
Volume 40 - Page 272
CPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT
OUNCIL MEMBERS
4r 99 `G� 9G�
®1 l+ 9 F,Q y�9 July 14, 1986
Ayes x
Noes x
An
All Ayes
Motion
•
0
q
MINUTES
x x x Following discussion, the
x x substitute motion made by Council
Member Cox was voted on and
carried..
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
X Thirty percent (30 %) of the total
dwelling units constructed on all
sites shall be affordable to
low- and moderate- income families.
Affordability Mix
i
The City Manager summarized the
recommendation of the Planning
Commission designated as
Alternative "A," and the Planning
Commission recommendation with
staff recommended changes, noted as
Alternative "B."
x Following discussion, motion was
made to approve Alternative "B,"
with the language to read as
follows:
The affordability mix for any
project which uses the
Mortgage Revenue Bond program
and the Big Canyon /MacArthur
project shall be as follows:
66.7% County Low Income per
Housing Element
33.3% City Very Low Income per
Housing Element
(with rents not to exceed
HUD Section 8 'Fair
Market Rents')
The affordability mix for any
project, with the exception of
the Big Canyon /MacArthur
project, which is unable to
use the Mortgage Revenue Bond
program shall be as follows:
33.3% County Median Imcome per
Housing Element
33.3% County Low Income per
Housing Element.
33.3% City Very Low Income per
Housing Element
(with rents not to exceed
HUD Section 8 'Fair
Market Rents')
The affordable units may be
provided on sites owned by The
Irvine Company other than
those in Newport Center and
Volume 40 - Page 273
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL J•� \\\ 'S S v @
�, ��`� ®1 L ��� July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
the Peripheral sites,
GPA 85 -1(B)i
specifically Haywood, Bayport,
86 -2(A)
Mariners Square, and
Promontory Point, subject to
the review and approval of the
Planning Commission.
Dave Dmohowski of The Irvine
Company, addressed the Council and
stated that they have no objections
with the intent of the
clarification, as set forth in the
subject motion; however, he would
suggest that Newport North also be
added to The Irvine Company sites,
to which Council Member Plummer
agreed.
Council Member Strauss suggested
that the words, "and City Council"
be added after the word
"Commission" in the above motion,
to which Council Member Plummer
agreed.
All Ayes
The motion, as amended, was voted
on and carried.
Motion
x
Preference shall be given to
All Ayes
Section 8 Certificate holders for
the "City Very Low Income" units.
•
Term Affordability
of
Discussion ensued with regard to
the Planning Commission
recommendation, and the
Commission's recommendation with
staff recommended changes, wherein
the applicant was requested to
address the podium for
clarification.
Dave Dmohowski of The Irvine
Company, stated that the City's
Housing Element sets forth a
requirement of a minimum of 10
years of affordability, and up to
this point, all previous affordable
projects have been approved, such
as Newport North, Baywood, and the
off -site improvements for Brisa del
Mar, etc., for 10 years, so the
recommendation for 20 years of
affordability does represent a new
term of affordability in their
•
projects. He stated that they
agreed with staff to the 20 year
term of affordability, with the
provision that if economic
conditions have changed
Volume 40 - Page 274
®UNCIL MEMBERS
('\ 1P�9GSCG�F 9G9�99,p\
•
•
Motion
All Ayes
•
9 \
\Vl
X
• •-
MINUTES
July 14, 1986
substantially at the time of
refinancing, that they would have
some relief so that if financing
was not available at a reasonable
rate at that time, they would not
have difficulty in extending that
term of affordability up to the
full 20 years. He stated that they
support. the language set forth in
Alternative "B."
Council. Member Strauss commented
that he was pleased to see the
change in the term of affordability
from 10 to 20 years, and favored
the language set forth in
Alternative "A," as opposed to
Alternative "B."
Following comments by Council
Members Cox and Agee with regard to
Alternative "B," Brad Olsen of The
Irvine Company, addressed the
Council and stated that they have
had extensive discussions with the
staff on this subject and are
sympathetic with the spirit and
desire of the Council. They are
also very adversed to the idea of
subsidy. He stated that he felt
the point was that, while financing
is available initially, and you're
talking about long -term financing,
there is a letter of credit that
goes behind the bond issue that
runs between 10 and 12 years, and
that is all the further lenders are
willing to go in their experience.
The discussions with staff were
that at the end of the letter of
credit period, they would make
every effort to renegotiate
financing that would carry it on
out to that 20 -year period of time.
Following discussion, motion was
made to modify the language in
Alternative "B" to read as follows:
"The term of affordability shall be
20 years from the date of initial
occupancy. This provision may be
reevaluated at the time refinancing
is required. This affordability
term shall be a minimum of 10 years
and shall continue as long as
reasonable financing for the
original loan amount to support the
rents required by this GPA is
available. Any change in the term
Volume 40 - Page 275
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
.o
\CAL
R ®LL 99 CG3 9GP �9� F9� c�F
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
of affordability shall be approved GPA 85 -1(B)I
by the City Council. 86 -2(A)
Motion
x
Affordable Sites: The affordable
Ayes
,units may be located on any
residential site within the Newport
Center and on the peripheral sites
or on others within the City of
Newport- Beach owned by The Irvine
Company (Baywood, Bayport, Mariners
Square, Promontory Point and
Newport North); however, they shall
be phased on all sites proportional
to the market rate residential
units.
Motion
x
Remaining "Pool" Affordable Units:
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
x
The 29 remaining "pool" affordable
Abstain
x
units in the Baywood expansion may
be used to satisfy a portion of the
affordable housing requirement for
this General Plan Amendment. These
units shall be committed for a
period of twenty years as defined
in Item No. 4 of the affordable
housing requirements. The onsite
affordability mix may reflect the
previous prerental commitment of
80% at County median and 20% at
County Low Income standards, but
the overall provision of affordable
•
housing shall reflect he
affordability ratios set forth in
Section 2 of the affordable housing
requirements.
Motion
x
Issuance of Building Permits:
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
x
Prior to issuance of building
Abstain
x
permits for any development
permitted by GPA 85 -1(B), the
applicant shall enter into an
affordable housing agreement with
the City guaranteeing the provision
of the affordable units. This
agreement may be included within
the development agreement.
LAND USE PHASING
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve the
Ayes
x
x
x
Planning Commission's
Noes
x
x
x
x
recommendation, with one addition,
to read as follows:
No residential development
(PCH /Jamboree, Newport
Village, Newporter North, Big
•
Canyon) units required (prior
to issuance of building or
Volume! 40 - Page 276
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL
ROLL July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
grading permits) for: A. Fashion GPA 85 -1(B),
Island; B. Civic Plaza Expansion; 86 -2(A)
and C. Day Care Center, which
motion FAILED.
on
q
x
In view of the foregoing, motion
s
x
x
x
x
was made to approve the
Noes
x
x
recommendation designated as
Abstain
x
Alternative "B," which reads as
follows:
No residential development
shall be required to be under
construction prior to the
issuance of building permits
for the following sites:
A. Fashion Island
B. Civic Plaza
Expansion
C. Block 600
D. Bayview Landing
E. Avocado /MacArthur
(including Day
Care Center)
F. Corporate Plaza
Notion
x
Motion. was made to approve
Ayes
x
x
x
x
Alternative "B," which reads as
N es
x
x
follows:
ain
x
400 residential units must
have building permits issued
and show substantial progress
in construction (foundations
Plus framing) before:
A. The issuance of a
certificate of
occupancy for:
i. Block 600
B. The issuance of
building permits
for:
ii. Block 800
iii. Corporate Plaza
West
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
Ayes
x
x
x
x
Alternative "B," which reads as
Noes
x
x
follows:
Abstain
x
•
400 units must have
certificates of occupancy
issued and 400 additional
units must have building
permits issued and show
substantial progress in
Volume 40 - Page 277
COUNCIL MEMBERS
cof
1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
9c «
.p July 14, 1986
MINUTES
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
construction before the issuance of
certificates of occupancy for:
A. Block 800
B. Corporate Plaza West
Moo n
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative "B," as revised by the
applicant to read as follows:
Prior to the issuance of any
building or grading permits
for any components of GPA
85-1(B), all dedications from
The Irvine Company, necessary
for the completion of the
Coast Highway Improvement
Program, from MacArthur
Boulevard to the Coast Highway
bridge, shall have been made.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
Alternative "C," as submitted by
Noes
x
x
Council Member Agee, and amended by
the applicant, which reads as
follows:
The following projects may
proceed after Coast Highway
dedications and Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and
•
Avocado Avenue dedications and
completion bonding and before
installation of Pelican Hill
Road. In the case of
MacArthur Boulevard,
reservations shall be to the
full Master Plan width as
amended, and dedications
and completion bonding for six
lane, major arterial
standards:
A. Fashion Island
B. Civic Plaza
Expansion
C. Newporter North
D. PCH /Jamboree
E. Day Care Center -
Avocado /MacArthur
(Grading for entire
site)
F. Bayview Landing
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
X
x
x
x
x
x
Alternative "C," as submitted by
x
Council Member Agee, and amended by
Council Member Plummer, and the
applicant, which reads as follows:
Volume 40 - Page 278
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS i
co JA q �i S S 9
ROLL CAL G�`r � y�9 July 14, 1986
MINUTES
UT61:1 U
Building or grading permits
GPA 85 -1(B)�
for the following projects may
86 -2(A)
be issued upon commencement of
construction of Pelican Hill
Road from Coast Highway to
MacArthur Boulevard, and
MacArthur Boulevard
improvements from San Miguel
Road to Bonita Canyon Road:
A. Block 600
B. Corporate Plaza
C. Big Canyon /MacArthur
D. Newport Village
E. Avocado/MacArthur-
Office
The completion of MacArthur
Boulevard improvements between
Coast Highway and San Miguel
Drive shall be done as
adjacent improvements for the
Newport Village site. Grading
permits for the Newport
Village development may be
issued upon commencement of
construction of adjacent
MacArthur Boulevard
improvements and construction
shall be completed prior to
issuance of Certificates
of Occupancy for Newport
Village. The number of lanes
constructed in this segment of
MacArthur Boulevard shall be
subject to criteria
established in other
requirements applicable to the
approval of General Plan
Amendment 85 -1(B).
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative "B," which reads as
follows:
Certificate of Occupancy may
not be issued for the
following project until the
completion of construction of
four lanes of Pelican Hill
Road and the completion to
Major Arterial Standards of
MacArthur Boulevard
improvements between San
Miguel Drive to Ford Road:
A. Block 600
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
Alternative "C," as revised by the
Noes
x
x
applicant, which reads as follows"
Volume 40 - Page 279
COUNCIL MEMBERS
n s o 1- 'S v
ROLL CAL Gds � $�9 July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
Building or grading permits
GPA 85 -1(B)/
for the following projects may
86 -2(A)
be issued upon the completion
to Major Arterial Standards,
MacArthur Boulevard
•
improvements between Ford Road
and Bonita Canyon Road:
A. Block 800
B. Corporate Plaza West
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve the
All Ayes
following addition to the Phasing
Section, as submitted by Council
Member Plummer, and revised by the
applicant, which reads as follows:
This General Plan Amendment
establishes planning limits on
the intensity and density of
land uses for sites in and
around Newport Center. Actual
development of the sites can
occur only after numerous
additional approvals or
permits are granted by the
Planning Commission and City
Council. These subsequent
approvals include a traffic
study, rezoning, a development
•
agreement, site plan review,
subdivision maps and use
permits.
In these subsequent approvals,
the phasing of that
development with roadway
improvements may be
reconsidered and modified by
the City Council if there is a
significant change in the
traffic assumptions made and
circumstances considered in
any prior approvals for the
development, including those
traffic assumptions made and
circumstances considered for
this General Plan Amendment.
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative ^C," as revised by the
applicant, which reads as follows:
A landscape program for
•
MacArthur Boulevard shall be
reviewed and approved by the
City Council prior to the
issuance of any building or
grading permits for any
Volume. 40 - Page 280
MINUTES
INDEX
component of GPA 85 -1(B). The GPA 85 -1(B),
landscaping shall be installed 86 -2(A)
concurrent with MacArthur
Boulevard improvements.
Between San Joaquin Hills Road
•
and Ford Road, The Irvine
Company shall dedicate, and
the City shall maintain,
additional right -of -way
required to create a
landscaped parkway. The
landscaping shall compliment
other landscaping in the area.
In areas where large land
dedications will occur, an
open parkway with
low- maintenance landscaping
shall be implemented,
consistent with the concept
proposed by The Irvine Company
in exhibits prepared by SWA.
Motion
x
Discussion ensued with regard to
the criteria to widen MacArthur
Boulevard, and following comments
by Council Members, as well as
other interested residents, motion
was made to approve Alternative
"B," which reads as follows:
MacArthur Boulevard between
Coast Highway and San Miguel
Drive be improved to lower the
grade and move the road
westerly, as described in the
Environmental Impact Report
prepared for General Plan
Amendment 85 -1(B).
Motion
x
Following further consideration,
Ayes
x
x
x
substitute motion was made to
Noes
x
x
x
x
approve Alternative "C," which
reads as follows:
MacArthur Boulevard between
Coast Highway and San Miguel
Road shall be improved to
lower the grade and move the
road westerly, as described in
the Environmental Impact
Report prepared for General
Plan Amendment 85 -1(B). The
road shall be constructed as a
six -lane divided highway in
conjunction with the
development of the Newport
•
Village site, which motion
FAILED.
Volume 40 - Page 281
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CALGrn� July 14, 1986
MINUTES
FiTno :4
Motion
x
In view of the foregoing action,
GPA 85 -1(B),
Council Member Cox moved to modify
86 -2(A)
Alternative 11B" to read as follows:
MacArthur Boulevard between
•
Coast Highway and San Miguel
Drive shall be subject to the
following in conjunction with
the Circulation Phasing
requirements:
A. MacArthur Boulevard
between Coast
Highway and San
Miguel Drive shall
be improved to lower
the grade and move
the road westerly,
as described in the
Environmental Impact
Report prepared for
General Plan
Amendment 85 -1(B).
B. Two outside through
lanes in each
direction on
MacArthur Boulevard
shall be constructed
so that additional
lanes constructed,
•
when required by the
City, will occur
towards the
centerline of the
roadway, between
Harbor View Drive
and the prolongation
of the centerline of
Crown Drive.
C. That prior to the
construction of
through lanes in
excess of four for
MacArthur Boulevard
between Harbor View
Drive and a
prolongation of the
centerline of Crown
Drive, the following
criteria, as a
minimum, shall be
met:
•
Volume: 40 - Page 282
COUNCIL MEMBERS
C+�¢ ��9GS`G�F
•
•
•
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
i) Completion of
Pelican Hill
Road to Primary
Arterial
configuration
(4 lanes,
divided), from
Coast Highway
to the
intersection of
MacArthur
Boulevard.
ii) Completion of
San Joaquin
Hills Road to
Primary
Arterial
configuration
(4 lanes,
divided)
easterly of
Spyglass Hill
Road, and
connection to
Pelican Hill
Road.
iii) An average
weekday
volume -to-
capacity ratio
of 1.05 on
MacArthur
Boulevard in
the vicinity of
Harbor View
Drive. In
adopting this
criteria
relative to the
widening of
MacArthur
Boulevard, it
is the position
of the City
Council that a
primary purpose
in considering
this General
Plan Amendment
is the
reduction of
diversion
traffic through
residential
streets in
Corona del Mar.
Volume. 40 - Page 283
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
It is GPA 85 -1(B)/
anticipated 86 -2(A)
that if the
average weekday
•
volume -to-
capacity ratio
on MacArthur
Boulevard
reached 1.05,
diversions to
local Corona
del Mar streets
such as
Marguerite
Avenue, Poppy
Street and
Fifth Avenue
would occur.
iv) A decision has
been made
regarding the
construction of
the San Joaquin
Hills
Transportation
Corridor or
July 1, 1995,
whichever
occurs first.
•
A public
hearing shall
be conducted by
the Planning
Commission and
the City
Council to
verify
satisfaction of
the criteria
and the
desirability of
the roadway
widening.
All Ayes
Following comments by Debra Allen,
Jean Morris, the staff and Council
Members, the motion was voted on
and carried.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative "A," as revised by the
applicant, which reads as follows:
•
Volume 40 - Page 284
COUNCIL MEMBERS
�
�
'F
July 14, 1986 \CAL A r
ROLL iP
�
MINUTES
INDEX
All mitigation measures
GPA 85 -1(B)/
outlined in the Final EIR, as
86 -2(A)
modified by the straw votes,
shall be required.
Don
x
Motion was made to approve
Alternative "C,"
Ayes
which reads as
follows:
The Irvine Company shall
aggressively pursue all
necessary approvals and
construction of San Joaquin
Hills Road from Spyglass Hill
Road to Pelican Hill Road.
The extension of San Joaquin
Hills Road shall be connected
to Pelican Hill Road upon
completion of four lanes of
Pelican Hill Road.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
x
Alternative "A," which reads as
Noes
x
follows:
A Development Agreement and
overall Planned Community
Development Plan for Newport
Center shall be prepared and
approved concurrent with or
prior to any further
is
discretionary actions, and in
any case, prior to issuance of
building permits for the
development allowed by the
General Plan Amendment.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative "A," which reads as
follows:
The initial construction of
Pelican Hill Road from Coast
Highway to MacArthur Boulevard
shall be a minimum of four
lanes.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve
All Ayes
Alternative "C, "which reads as
follows:
As part of the MacArthur
Boulevard improvements, The
Irvine Company shall submit
plans and a feasibility study
for the construction of a
•
grade- separated pedestrian
Volume 40 - Page 285
COUNCIL MEMBERS
o \\
� t"-V c�F
NDI I_ ®� � yF9 July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
and bicycle bridge over
GPA 85 -1(B)/
MacArthur Boulevard between
86 -2(A)
San Miguel Drive and Coast
Highway. The City Council
will determine the feasibility
•
of this facility and may
require its construction as
part of the MacArthur
Boulevard improvement program.
Hearing no others wishing to
address the Council, the public
hearing was closed.
Council. Member Hart requested that
The Irvine Company share their
Traffic Management Plan at a future
City Council study session.
Motion
x
Motion was made to incorporate by
by reference the results of the
straw votes, and
Adopt Resolution No. 86 -54
Res 86 -54
certifying as complete and
adequate, the Final
Environmental Impact Report
for General Plan Amendment
85 -1(B);
Make the Findings contained in
•
the Statement of Facts with
respect to significant impacts
identified in the Final
Environmental Impact Report;
Find that the facts set forth
in the Statement of Facts and
the Statement of Overriding
Considerations are true and
supported by substantial
evidence in the record,
including the Final
Environmental Impact Report;
With respect to the project,
find that although the Final
Environmental Impact Report
identifies certain unavoidable
significant environmental
effects that will result if
the project is approved, the
mitigation measures identified
shall be incorporated into the
General Plan, and all
•
Volume. 40 - Page 286
E_1 ,
-P
•
•
•
9 \
\�F
July 14, 1986
MINUTES
significant environmental
effects that can feasibly be
mitigated or avoided have been
eliminated or reduced to an
acceptable level, and that the
remaining unavoidable
significant effects, when
balanced against the facts set
forth in said Statement of
Overriding Considerations,
giving greater weight to the
unavoidable environmental
effects, are acceptable;
Adopt Resolution No. 86 -55
approving General Plan
Amendment No. 85 -1(B),
approving certain amendments
to the Land Use, Recreation
and Open Space and Circulation
Elements of the Newport Beach
General Plan;
Adopt Resolution No. 86 -56
approving Amendment No. 9 to
the Local Coastal Program,
Land Use Plan, being
amendments to Maps No. 29, 30,
37, 38, 48 and 60, and related
text in connection with the
approval and adoption of
General Plan Amendment No.
8:5 -1(B); and
Adopt Resolution No. 86 -57
approving General Plan
Amendment No. 86 -2(A),
approving a certain amendment
to the Circulation Element of
the Newport Beach General
Plan.
Council Member Hart stated for the
record: 11As I told all the City
Council Members and The Irvine
Company, my vote in support of the
General Plan Amendment would be
determined on the amount of open
space voted in this evening. I
especially mentioned keeping
Bayview Landing open space, and I
still feel the same way, with all
the excess density added this
evening, in my opinion. The
Planning Commission recommendation
on Phasing the development would
work better, 1 think, than some of
Volume: 40 - 287
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
Res 86 -55
Res 86 -56
Res 86 -57
•
Ayes I x
Noes x
Motion
Ayes
Noes x I x
10
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
MINUTES
the phasing we did. People have
always been in search for the
perfect place to live. Newport
Beach is close, but with all the
new high -rise, we also need simple
open space. So it is no surprise
to anyone, either the City Council
or The Irvine Company, I must vote
'no. 01t
Council. Member Strauss also stated
that he will be voting "no" for the
reasons as set forth in the
prepared statement he read into the
record earlier in the meeting.
The motion made by Council Member
Cox was voted on and carried.
In view of the lateness of the hour
(1:15 a.m.), motion was made to
adjourn, which motion FAILED.
Council Member Heather was excused from the
meeting at this tame.
2. Mayor Maurer opened the Public hearing
regarding:
PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 635
A request of THE PACIFIC CLUB, Newport
Beach, to amend a portion of the KOLL
CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS so as to delete restaurant
uses from Office Site "A," and to permit
a private club in Office Site "A,11 not
to exceed 30,000 sq. ft. in area,
subject to the securing of a use permit;
and the acceptance of an Environmental
Document. Property located in Koll
Center; bounded by MacArthur Boulevard,
Von Karman Avenue and Birch Street;
zoned P -C;
TRAFFIC STUDY - A request to approve a
traffic study in conjunction with the
expansion of THE PACIFIC CLUB, a private
club in the KOLL CENTER PLANNED
COMMUNITY;
0
USE PERMIT NO. 3208 - A request to
permit the expansion of the dining areas
and the addition of an accessory
athletic facility for THE PACIFIC CLUB,
a private club in the KOLL CENTER
NEWPORT PLANNED COMMUNITY.
Volume 40 - Page 288
GPA 85 -1(B)/
86 -2(A)
PCA 635
(94)
Traffic
Study
U/P 3208
(88)
&on x
Ayes x x x x x
Abstain x
on
Ay e;
•
X
MINUTES
Report from the Planning Department, was
presented.
Hearing no one wishing to address the
Council, the public hearing was closed.
Motion was made to adopt Resolution No.
86 -58, amending the Koll Center Planned
Community Development Standards as
recommended by the Planning Commission;
approve the Traffic Study in conjunction
with the expansion of The Pacific Club;
approve Use Permit No. 3208, permitting
the expansion of the dining areas and
the addition of an accessory athletic
facility for the Pacific Club and accept
the Environmental Document, as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
E. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Council Member Strauss announced that he
will be a candidate for re- election in
November, 1986. He stated there are
still some challenges left which he is
interested in dealing with, such as the
Bay, the Airport, balancing traffic with
developments, etc.
F. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following actions were taken as
indicated, except for those items removed:
1. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION:
None.
2. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION:
PCA 635
Res 86 -58
(a) Resolution No. 86 -59 establishing NpB Hrbr
the City of Newport Beach HARBOR Qlty /CAC
QUALITY CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Res 86 -59
(HQ /CAC). (24)
(Note: After the agenda was
printed the following was received:
A letter from the Chairman of
the Quality of Life /Citizens
Advisory Committee, dated July
8, 1986, in support of
resolving the health and
welfare problem of the Harbor
and Bay; and
A letter from Dover Shores
Community Association wishing
to suggest an individual to
actively participate in the
foregoing Committee.)
Volume 40 - Page 289
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\CAL �i 9 �i 9G9 9� C�tn f �Fy� �� �P July 14, 1986
ROLL INDEX
(b) Resolution No. 86 -60 declaring that
Balboa B1
the demolition of vacant dwellings
Wideng/
purchased for the widening of
Demolition
Balboa Boulevard is of urgent
Res 86 -60
necessity for the preservation of
(74)
life, health, and property; and
•
that the contract therefor may be
let without advertising for formal
public works bids; and approve the
plans end specifications, and
authorize the staff to proceed with
an informal contract to complete
the demolition work. (Report from
Public Works Department)
(c) Resolution No. 86 -61 advising the
Mstr Pln Ste
AHFP Advisory Committee that the
& Hwys /Cir
City has adopted amendments to the
Element
City's Circulation Element Master
Res 86 -61
Plan of Streets and Highways, and
(74)
requesting that the County modify
its Master Plan of Arterial
Highways within the City to conform
to the City's new Master Plan
[Annual Requalification of City of
Newport: Beach in the County
Arterial Highway Financing
Program]. (Report from Public
Works Department)
(d) Removed from the Consent Calendar.
•
(e) Resolution No. 86 -62 establishing
Pers /CMgr/
the salaries of the City Manager,
C /Aty /CClk
City Attorney and City Clerk for
Res 86 -62
1986 -87 Fiscal Year and amending
(66).
the Classification and Compensation
Plan to reflect said changes.
(f) Resolution No. 86 -63 requesting the
Election'86
Board of Supervisors of the County
Res 86 -63
of Orange to consolidate a General
(39)
Municipal Election to be held on
November 4, 1986, with the
Statewide General Election to be
held on said date pursuant to
Section 23302 of the Elections
Code. (Report from Assistant City
Attorney)
(g) Resolution No. 86 -64 Calling and
Election'8(
Giving Notice of the Holding of a
Res 86 -64
General Municipal Election to be
(39)
held on Tuesday, November 4, 1986,
for the election of certain
officers as required by the
provisions of the Charter and for
•
submission to qualified electors of
the City of a measure relating to
amendment to the Newport Beach City
Charter. (See report with agenda
item F -2(f))
Volume 40 - Page 290
P ,;
•
•
MINUTES
July 14, 1986
(h) Resolution No. 86 -65 authorizing
the Mayor to sign the First
Amendment to Health Services
Agreement. (Report from the City
Manager)
3. CONTRACTS/AC,REEMENTS:
(a) Award Contract No. 2478 to Now
Construction Corporation, of Santa
Fe Springs, in the amount of
$769,469; and authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said
contract for Warehouse, Wash Rack
Cover, and Pavement at the
Corporation Yard. (Report from
Public Works Department)
(b) Authorize the City Manager to enter
into an Agreement retaining Donald
C. Simpson, Civil Engineer, as a
temporary part -time employee for
special. project management services
for Capital Projects Program.
(Report: from Public Works
Department)
(c) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute an Amendment to a
Consultant Agreement with
Norris -- Repke, Inc., for the
preparation of plans,
specifications and cost estimates
for the overall Street Improvements
Master Plan for Cannery Village.
(Report from Public Works
Department)
(d) .Removed from the Consent Calendar.
(e) Approve a Service Agreement with
the County of Orange for a sewer
connection at Campus Drive and
North Bristol Street; and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
subject agreement. (Report from
Public Works Department)
(f) Approve Agreements regarding
Transfer of Mobilehome Space and
Compensation for Services and
Costs, and authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute same for the
following in Newport Beach
Marinapark: Space No. 2 -E; Space
No. 5 -E; and Space No. 3 -E.
Volume. 40 - Page 291
0/C Health
ServAgm /CNB
Res 86 -65
C -1802
(38)
Warehouse
Wash Rack/
Corp Yard
C -2478
(38)
Prj /Simpson
C -2596
(38)
Cannery Vlg/
Norris -Repke
C -2469
(38)
C/O ServAgm
Swr Cnctn
C -2597
(38)
Marinapark
Mobilehm
Tsfrs
C- 2598(2E)
C- 2599(5E)
C- 2600(3E)
(38)
:7
0
•
5.
•
MINUTES
(g) Approve Agreement for Supplemental
Law Enforcement Services between
the City of Newport Beach and the
City of Irvine; and authorize the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute
subject: agreement. (Report from
Police Department)
COMMUNICATIONS - For referral as
indicated:
(a) To Public Works Department for
inclusion in the records, letters
from Jane Hietbrink (in support of
street lights) and Corona del Mar
Chamber of Commerce in support of
lighting and metering of all
municipal parking lots.
(b) To City Clerk for inclusion in the
records, letter from Cameo
Community Association acknowledging
Council Member Agee °s tireless
efforts in representing them during
his term of office on the Newport
Beach City Council.
Irvine /CNB
Splmtl Law
EnfcmSery
C -2144
(38)
PW
(74)
City Council
(33)
(c) To Traffic Engineer for response, Traffic
letter from Elizabeth and Everett (85)
Sadler regarding traffic conditions
at the corner of Ocean Boulevard
and Marigold, Corona del Mar.
(d) To the Police Department for Police
inclusion in the records, letter of (70)
thanks from the "permanent"
residents in the 100 and 109 -32nd
Street area for the quick response
to calls concerning noise and
traffic preceding the July 4th
weekend.
(e) To Planning Department for Planning
response, request for information (68)
regarding the Anderson Project
(2901 West Coast Highway), and
Shokrian Project (2912 West Coast
Highway) from Don Williams.
COMMUNICATIONS - For referral to the
City Clerk for inclusion in the records:
(a) Letter from Bonnie Jeannette to the
Quality of Life Citizens Advisory
Committee regarding the City taking
action towards improving the
quality of life on the beaches,
suggesting stringent penalties for
violators.
Volume 40 - Page 292
COUNCIL HEWERS
r ao¢ X99 sG� 9 G,py99J, ��F
July 14, 1986
•
is
(b) Preliminary Agenda for the Orange
County Local Agency Formation
Commission of July 9, 1986.
6. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - For denial and
confirmation of the City Clerk's
referral to the claims adjuster:
(a) William K. Austin alleging tree
limb fell onto parked vehicle and
caused damage to fender, hood,
antenna, etc. on June 5, 1986 at
Harbor Island and Bayside Drive.
(b) Joyce Barnes alleging personal
injuries as a result of tripping
over large beam near 327 Alvarado
Place on March 28, 1986.
MINUTES
(c) George Hodgkins alleging City
pickup truck scraped right rear
fender attempting to pass
claimant's parked vehicle in alley
behind 233;1 E. Bayfront on June 21,
1986.
(d) Steiny & Company seeking indemnity
from claim filed by Linda and Jerry
Murray, (July 16, 1985 at
intersection of Superior Avenue)
which was denied by the City
Council on September 23, 1985.
(e) Julie F. Waugen alleging personal
injuries as a result of stepping
onto curb near intersection of
southbound Balboa Boulevard,
McFadden Place and 22nd Street on
May 1, 1986.
(f) Application to Present Late Claim
of Jean Copeland alleging shoreline
to boat cut on August 2, 1985
during the oil well fire by Harbor
Department , (who were working
under direction of City Fire
Department) thereby seeking
replacement of cost of shoreline
near 121 40th Street.
For rejection:
(g) Late Claim of Allan Baumgartel
seeking indemnity from claim filed
by Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance
Company, (July 8, 1985 at Newport
Center Drive and Santa Cruz) on
behalf of Sandra Beigel which was
denied. by City Council on August
22, 1985.
Volumme 40 - Page 293
(36)
Austin
Barnes
Steiny & Co/
Murray
Waugen
Copeland
Baumgartel
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL \CAL9� �G�
Gad' ��� July 14, 1986
MINUTES
INDEX
7. SUMMONS AND COMPLAINTS - For denial and
(36)
confirmation of the City Clerk's
referral to the claims adjuster:
(a) Cross - Complaint from The Griffith
Griffith Co)
•
Company, Orange County Superior
Pruett
Court, Case No. 45- 61 -98, seeking
Indemnity from claim filed by
Tyrone A. Pruett.
(b) Cross - Complaint for Equitable
Koll Co/
Indemnity, Total Indemnity and
Buratti
Declaratory Relief, Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 39- 11 -38,
from the Roll Company regarding
claim filed by Vincent Lee Buratti,
which claim was denied by City
Council on July 26, 1982.
(c) Damages involving personal
Weyant
injuries, assault and battery,
negligence, etc., from Harold E.
and Barbara Weyant, Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 47- 93 -83.
Claim was denied by City Council on
July 22, 1985.
8. REQUEST TO FILL PERSONNEL VACANCIES:
(66)
(Report from the City Manager)
(a) Approve five Police Officers,
•
Patrol Division.
(b) Approve one Police Lieutenant,
Patrol Division.
(c) Approve two Police Captains,
Administrative Division.
(d) Approve one Police Clerk I,
Administrative Division.
(e) Approve one Building Inspector I,
Building Department.
(f) Approve one Refuse Crew Worker,
Refuse Division.
9. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS -
For Council information and approval:
(a) Election of Parks, Beaches and
PB &R Cmsn/
Recreation Commission Officers for
Ofcrs'86 /87
Fiscal Year 1986 -87. (Report from
(24)
Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Director)
Volume 40 - Page 294
0
•
•
(b)
Election of Board of Library
Trustees' Officers for Fiscal Year
1986 787. (Report from the Newport
Beach Boatd of Library Trustees)
(c)
Recreation and Open Space Elements
of General Plan Amendment No.
85 -1(B). (Report from Parks,
Beaches and Recreation Director)
(d)
Report from City Attorney regarding
Legal Services estimate for
O'Donnell and Gordon (Contract
2331) for period July 1 to August
31, 1986.
(e)
Report from City Attorney regarding
letter from O'Donnell and Gordon
for waiver of potential conflict
(representation of Group W Cable).
(f)
Report from Public Works Department
regarding their recommendations for
the Little Corona Beach Study.
10. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULING - For July 28,
1986:
(a) CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS AND CURBS
AT 205 AND 206 ORANGE STREET,
NEWPORT SHORES - Public hearing to
hear objections or protests from
anyone regarding the construction
of sidewalks adjacent to 205 and
206 Orange Street using the
procedure of Chapter 27 of the
Improvement Act of 1911. (Report
from Public Works Department)
11. FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 12271 - Approve
the Final Map of Tract No. 12271, a
request of the DONALD L. BREN COMPANY,
Newport Beach, to subdivide 26.9 acres
of land into 159 numbered lots for
detached single - family development; one
lettered lot for private recreational
purposes; and six lettered lots for
private street purposes. Property
generally bounded by MacArthur
Boulevard, Bison Avenue, Camelback
Street, Jamboree Road and University
Drive (Extended), commonly known as AREA
5 of the NORTH FORD PLANNED COMMUNITY.
(Report from the Planning Department)
12. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
Volume 40 - Page 295
Bd Library
Trustees/
Ofcrs'86 /87
(24)
PB &R.
(62/45)
O'Donnell/
Gordon
C -2331
(38)
O'Donnell/
Gordon/
Grp W
(42/31)
PW /PB &R
(74/62)
Sdwlk /Crbs
205/206 Orng
(74)
Fn1MpTr12271
r
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\CAL
ROLL o99 �G� 9Gp �9� X91 ctP(t
Gds July 14, 1985
MINUTES
INDEX
13. CITY COUNCIL. TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION AND Cncl Expns
EXPENSE RECORD- Approve expense record (33)
for Council Member Evelyn Hart regarding
trip to Sacramento on June 30, 1986 to
•
give testimony (Senate Bill 362).
14. RESUBDIVISION NO. 713 - Accept the Resub 713
public improvements constructed in (84)
conjunction with Resubdivision No. 713;
(Lots 7 & 8;, Block 6, Balboa Tract,
located at 109 -111 Palm Street, on the
southwesterly corner of Palm Street and
East Balboa Boulevard, in Central
Balboa) and authorize the City Clerk to
release the Faithful Performance Bond
(#SB 001279) and Labor and Material Bond
(#SB 001279) in six months provided no
claims have been filed. (Report from
Public Works Department)
15. RESUBDIVISION NO. 776 - Accept the Resub 776
public improvements constructed in (84)
conjunction with Resubdivision No. 776;
(A portion of Block 93, Irvine's
subdivision, located at 1601 Avocado
Avenue, on the westerly side of Avocado
Avenue, between San .Joaquin Hills Road,
and San Nicholas Drive, in Newport
Center) and authorize the City Clerk to
•
release the Faithful Performance Bond
(#SB 003293) and Labor and Material Bond
(#SB 003293) in six months provided no
claims have been filed. (Report from
the Public Works Department)
16. UPPER NEWPORT BAY BICYCLE AND EQUESTRIAN Upr Npt Bay/
TRAIL (CONTRACT 2435) - Approve the Bic /Equestrn
plans and specifications and authorize C -2435
the City Clerk to advertise for bids to (38)
be opened at 11:00 a.m. on August 14,
1986; and authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute the Grant of Easement
Agreement with the State Department of
Fish and Caine and execute the Funding
Agreement with the County of Orange.
(Report from the Public Works
Department)
17. TRACT NO. 12271 - Approve a Subdivision Tr 12271
Agreement guaranteeing completion of the
public improvements required with Tract
No. 12271; (Lot 9 of Tract No. 12309,
located on property bounded by Jamboree
Road, Camelback Street, La Salud, La
Vida and University Drive in the North
Ford Planned Community) and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
subject agreement. (Report from Public
Works Department)
Volume 40 - Page 296 •,
MINUTES
18. SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT - Uphold staff's Permits/
recommendation for approval of Special Evnt
Application No. 86 -160 regarding Salute #86 -160
to the Arts to be held on October 2, (65)
1986, and Insurance Indemnity Agreement.
•
(Report from Business License
Supervisor)
19. RESUBDIVISION NO. 822 - Accept offer of Resub 822
dedication of a corner cut -off at the (84)
southeasterly corner of site adjacent to
alley at 426 Avocado Avenue (Lot 38,
Tract No. 682). (Report from Public
Works Department)
20. BUDGET AMENDMENTS - For approval: (25)
BA -001, $23,285 - Decrease in
Unappropriated Surplus and Increase in
Budget Appropriations to provide for
salary and retirement increases; General
Fund.
G. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Report from Parks, Beaches and Bayside Dr/
Recreation :Director regarding proposed r- o- w /PB &R
resolution prohibiting vehicular access, (62)
except for emergency and public utility
vehicles, on the Bayside Drive
right -of -way between Carnation Avenue
•
and Jasmine Avenue, and directing the
City Clerk to record said resolution,
was presented.
Motion
x
Motion was made to remove this item from
All Ayes
the agenda as requested by the City
Attorney, and bring back at a later
date.
2. Report from Public Works Department Lifegrd Hdq
recommending approval of an Bldg /Hill
Architectural Services Agreement with Prtnrshp,Inc
the Hill Partnership, Inc., in the C -2594
amount of $16,000 to prepare plans for (38)
an Addition to the Lifeguard
Headquarters Building (Contract 2594);
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute subject agreement, was
presented.
Tom Hyans, 217 19th Street, representing
the Central Newport Beach Homeowners
Association, addressed the Council and
stated that the Lifeguard Headquarters
Building, when initially constructed,
was opposed by their Association;
however, they withdrew their argument
when they were assured by authorities
that the road leading from the 20th
Volume. 40 - Page 297
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\r-ALROLL �J+ �g� July 14, 1986
MINUTES
tI
Street end to the Lifeguard Building
service area, would be restricted to use
by emergency vehicles only. That road
is so posted; however, on any day of the
week, there are from three to fifteen
®
private vehicles parked at the building.
They feel this is somewhat of a "breach11
in goodfaith bargaining to the point
they would like to suggest that the
expenditure of funds for any planning to
modify the subject structure at this
time, is inappropriate. There is
planned restructure and relocation of
the public restroom within the scope of
the Cannery Village /McFadden Square
Specific Area Plan, and they believe a
northerly projection of the existing
building should be at least considered
for that purpose as an alternate to the
separate facility which would be an
added obstruction to the view at
McFadden. They would like to request
that the Council not approve this
„piecemeal" project outside the scope of
the general improvements planned for the
area.
Motion
x
Following discussion, motion was made to
All Ayes
approve the recommended action on the
•
agenda, and to direct the staff to
investigate and report back with regard
to the parking situation, as referred to
by Mr. Hyans.
3. Report from the Marine Department
Harbor Perm
regarding request to withdraw
Apl#112 -604
Application 11112 -604 by the Balboa Fun
(51)
Zone to revise subject commercial harbor
permit, bayward of 604 Edgewater, was
presented.
Motion
x
Motion was made to remove the subject
All Ayes
item from the agenda as requested by the
applicant.
H. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION:
1. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 86 -21, being,
Ord 86 -21
Prhbtg S1
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
Fd /Pblc Bch
BEACH AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE BY
(27)
ADDING SECTION 5.11.040,
PROHIBITING THE SALE OF FOOD
PRODUCTS ON PUBLIC BEACHES,
•
Volume 40 - Page 298
was presented for second reading with
report from Assistant City Attorney
dated June 16, 1986 with supplemental
report dated'. July 14, 1986.
•
Paul Ugolini., representing the Bayside
Cafe, addressed the Council in
opposition to the proposed Ordinance,
and stated they would like to continue
serving food'. on the beaches.
The City Manager made reference to a
letter from the County Health
Department which, in essence, stated
that "The maintaining of potentially
hazardous foods of 45 °F or below is
imperitive. Failure to do so, can
jeopardize the health of the consumer
and contribute to a greater potential
for foodborn. illness."
In response to the above statement, Mr.
Ugolini stated that it takes several
hours for food contamination to take
place, and that they deliver their food
within 15 minutes of its order.
Motion
x
Following discussion, motion was made to
All Ayes
adopt Ordinance No. 86 -21.
•
2. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 86 -22, being, Ord 86 -22
Picnickg/
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT Beaches
BEACH AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE BY (62)
DELETING SECTION 11.08.060,
PICNICKING ON BEACHES,
was presented for second reading with
report from Assistant City Attorney
dated June 1.6, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to adopt Ordinance No.
All Ayes
86 -22.
3. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 86 -23, being, Ord 86 -23
Annexation/
AN ORDNANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT SA Heights
BEACH APPROVING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (21)
FOR SANTA ANA HEIGHTS PROJECT AREA,
was presented for second reading with
report from Executive Assistant to the
City Manager, dated June 23, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to adopt Ordinance No.
x
x
x
x
x
86 -23.
x
Volume 40 - Page 299
MINUTES
I. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
None.
•
J. CURRENT BUSINESS:
1. BICYCLE TRAILS CITIZENS ADVISORY
BT /CAC
COMMITTEE.
Motion
x
Motion was made to defer to July 28,
All Ayes
1986, (District 1) Council Member
Strauss's appointment to fill the
unexpired term of David Paine for term
ending December 31, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to defer to July 28,
All Ayes
1986, (District 3) Council Member Hart's
appointment to fill the unexpired term
of Steve Fobes for term ending December
31, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to confirm (District 7)
All Ayes
Council Member Cox's appointment of
William H. Marshall to fill the
unexpired term of Mary Petropoulos for
term ending December 31, 1986.
2. QUALITY OF LIFE CITIZENS ADVISORY
QL /CAC
COMMITTEE VACANCIES:
n
x
Motion was made to defer to July 28,
Ayes
1986, (District 2) Mayor Pro Tem
Plummer's appointment to fill the
unexpired term of Rosemary Luxton for
term ending December 31, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to confirm (District 3)
All Ayes
Council Member Hart's appointment of
Doug Ammerman to fill the unexpired term
of Harry Merrill for term ending
December 31, 1986.
Motion
x
Motion was made to defer to July 28,
All Ayes
1986, (District 6) Council Member Agee's
appointment to fill the unexpired term
of Virginia Herberts for term ending
December 31, 1986.
3. Reports from the Recreation
Youth Counc]
Superintendent regarding appointments to
(24)
the Youth Ccuncil and recuest for
appointment of Council Member Liaison to
subject Council, were presented.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve the
Ayes
appointments to the Youth Council, as
listed in the staff report; and appoint
Council Member Heather as Liaison to the
Youth Council.
Volume 40 - Page 300
COUNCIL MEMBERS
ROLL \CAL
0
Motion
All Ayes
•
0
MINUTES
July 14, 1986
Traffic/
Bay /Edgewtr
Balboa FnZn
(85)
d
r
4. Proposed resolution regarding letter
from Fun Zone Boat Company, Inc.,
requesting that Washington Street,
between Bay Avenue and Edgewater be
designated as a loading zone only, was
presented.
Herb Herbert:s, resident, addressed the
Council and suggested that rather than
having a truck pull into Washington
Street, park, and then have to back out
onto Bay Avenue, a yellow stripe be
painted from the corner of the curb
where the Balboa Saloon is located, over
to the corner of the curb where the Fun
Zone is located. He felt this would
give an additional 20 to 25 feet of
temporary parking for loading and
unloading, and therefore, alleviate the
double -park situation.
x
Following discussion, motion was made to
refer this item back to staff for
further study and discussions with Mr.
Herberts of the Balboa Saloon, and
Bruce Wank of the Balboa Fun Zone.
K. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
None.
Meeting adjou at 1:50 a.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
'
9
City Clerk P
O
V
P
C'9CPF0 a�`
Volume 40 - Page 301
Traffic/
Bay /Edgewtr
Balboa FnZn
(85)
d
r