Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/08/1993 - Regular MeetingCOUNCIL MEMBERS 001 A Present. I x l x l x Excused Motion All Ayes A All Ayes Motion All Ayes • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING \ PLACE; Council Chambers TIME: 7:00 P.M. DATE: November S. 1993 ©© ©!;U] RH:� x x X x Y Reading of Minutes of Meeting of October 25, 1993, was waived, approved as written, and ordered filed. Reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration was waived, and City Clerk was directed to read by titles only. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were approved, except for those items removed: ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - Pass to second reading on November 22, 1993: 1. Removed from the Consent Calendar. Schedule for public hearing on November 22, 1993: 2. Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 93 -23, being, AN (ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING A PORTION OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 20, SO AS TO RECLASSIFY THE PARCEL KNOWN AS THE "SEAWARD 17 ' ANNEXATION" FROM THE UNCLASSIFIED DISTRICT TO THE R -1 -B DISTRICT (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 781). [Report from the Planning Department] RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION MINUTES (94) 93 -23 3. Resolution No. 93 -74, accepting the Vacation/ alley easements, 5.00 feet wide, Easements IRREVOCABLY OFFERED FOR DEDICATION Res 93 -74 REQUIRED WITH VARIANCE NO. 949 for 815 (90) East Bay Avenue AND with the approval of MODIFICATION NO. 566 for 811 East Bay Avenue; lots 5 & 7, Block 11, Balboa Tract, located at 811 & 815 East Bay Avenue, on the southwesterly side of East Bay Avenue, between Main Street and "A" Street, in Central Balboa. [Report from the Public Works Department] 4. Resolution No. 93 -75, recommending the Bus Lic/ California League of Cities draft and Vending sponsor LEGISLATION RESTRICTING OR Machines PROHIBITING THE SALE OF PORNOGRAPHY TO Res 93 -75 MINORS THROUGH VENDING MACHINES. (27) [Memorandum from the City Attorney] 5. Removed from the Consent Calendar. 6. Resolution No. 93 -78, authorizing the PD /Traing City Manager to execute a contract for Res 93 -78 a P.O.S.T. TRAINING VIDEO (GRANT (70) PROJECT). [Memorandum from the Assistant City Attorney] Volume 47 - Page 288 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES �,�`�y ROLL CRLL s November 8, 1993 • • CONTRACTS /AGREEMENTS 7. CENTRAL LIBRARY CONNUNITY ROOM FURNITURE BID CONTRACT NO. 2778(D) - Reject the bid of Hodkinson Torbenson as non- responsive and award Contract No. 2778 -D to Conde House for $38,640. [Report from the Public Works Department] 8. PERSONNEL VACANCIES - [Report from Personnel Director] 9. CLAINS - For Daniel by the City Manager Lisa Albert alleging large winds broke City tree branches which landed in back yard at 1848 Commodore Road on October 27, 1993, and damaged patio umbrella. Farina Dahma alleging damage to vehicle as result o£ running over deep dip in roadway on Evening Canyon Drive on October 10, 1993. James Allen Pierce alleging physical abuse by City Police Officers on June 24, 1993. Rescue Industries, Inc., being sued by Federal Insurance for subrogation of monies spent to compensate damage occurring on December 20, 1992 at 1521 Kings Road, on property owned by Peter James Piper, as result of water and savage backup and overflow, alleging negligence by City employee. 10. Removed from the Consent Calendar. 11. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULING - November 22, 1993: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 93 -1(A): LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 32; PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 781; AND TENTATIVE NAP OF TRACT NO. 14795. [Refer to report from Planning Department w /agenda item 2] 12. Removed from the Consent Calendar. 13. 1993 -94 SIDEWALK AND CURB AND COTTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM; AND LIDO ISLE SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT, PHASE I (CONTRACT NO. 2769) - Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a Cooperative Agreement with the Lido Isle Community Association; approve the plans and specifications; and authorize the City Clerk to advertise for bids to be opened at 11:00 A.M. on November 30, 1993. [Report from the Public Works Director] 14. ENCROACHIUM AGRHEMM AND DECLARATION OF COVENANTS BETWEEN LANDOWNERS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR DAY SCHOOL LOCATED AT 3443 PACIFIC VIEW DRIVE - Approve an Encroachment Agreement and Declaration of Covenants between Landowners permitting the construction of a Volume 47 - Page 289 COUNCIL MEMBERS • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH \%\1 November 8, 1993 Flashing School Beacon within the San Joaquin Hills Road right -of -way for the school loading zone on San Joaquin Hills Road;authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the agreement; and direct the City Clerk to have the agreement recorded with the Orange County Recorder. [Report from the Public Works Director] 15. Removed from the Consent Calendar. 16. UTILITIES YARD SITE WORK (CONTRACT N0. 2962) GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM - Approve plans and specifications; adopt the finding contained in the staff report pertaining to the Addendum to the EIR for the Groundwater Development Project; and authorize the City Clerk to advertise for bids for construction of the project to be opened at 1:30 p.m., on November 30, 1993. [Report from the Utilities Department] 17. BUDGET AMENDMENTS Rk -013, $12,000 - To increase appropriations on parking meter installations account for the CONVERSION OF PARKING METERS TO HIGHER RATE. RA -014, $5,600 - Transfer from the Tennis Court Reserve to the PARES, BEACHES AND RECREATION SELF - SUPPORTING BUDGET, for the bi- annual resurfacing of six tennis courts. BA -015, $15,000 - To increase part -time salaries appropriations in the PARES, BEACHES AND RECREATION SR. CITIZEN CENTER DIVISION. 1111:.3 M {,jE I J1 ,A I; Ef3�1 18. Mayor Pro Tem Watt opened the public hearing regarding PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DISTRICT 30. 13 (on West Coast Highway from Dover Drive westerly to Marino Drive, and on MacArthur Boulevard from East Coast Highway northerly to Crown Drive). [Report from the Public Works Department] The City Clerk advised that after the agenda was printed, a letter was received from Roberta Stickler, 2671 Crestview Drive, in opposition to the proposed Underground Utilities District No. 13. The Public Works Director summarized the staff report noting that this item is number 13 in a series of undergrounding utilities projects that are funded by the Southern California Edison Company in accordance with the ruling designated as Case 8209. There are two elements to this proposed project: 1) the pole line along Pacific Coast Highway opposite Bayshores from Marino Drive to Dover Drive; and 2) the pole line on the westerly side of MacArthur Boulevard from Pacific Coast Highway northerly to opposite Crown Drive. Volume 47 - Page 290 MINUTES INDEX Utilities Yd Site Work C -2962 (38) (40) Undergr Ut /Dist 13 (89) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS �+�5� November B. 1993 ROLL CRLL • • E The Public Works Director stated that these projects do not affect private properties with one exception; 31 private properties in Bayshores will require that their individual service connections be converted to underground at the expense of the property owners. The individual cost is estimated to vary between $1,000 and $2,500 per connection. The objection that has been received from Roberta Stickler is the only objection to date. A public informational meeting was conducted with residents potentially affected by the District, unfortunately it was not well attended, but all property owners within the proposed District were notified. The reason these two locations were included in the proposed District is that, 1) each location meets the PUC eligibility criteria, and 2) each location meets the City Council's priority criteria which was established several years ago. In response to Council inquiry, the Public Works Director reported as follows: " The purpose of this hearing is to determine whether or not this Underground Utilities District should be established. The District, if established, will not be using Assessment District funding for the Underground of Utilities. However, the Assessment District being explored for the Bayshores Community is for undergrounding the interior power lines within their area. If the service connections for the 31 property owners are installed in connection with Edison Company's 8209 project, the Edison Company will fund all of the service connection that is within the public right -of -way. Only the portion on private property must be funded by that property owner. The Public Works Director further indicated that no completion schedule has been developed as yet; and he felt the proposed District benefits the City as a whole, as well as the Bayshores Community." With respect to the hardship case of Roberta Stickler, 2671 Crestview Drive, Council Member Hart indicated she will pursue this issue with the respective homeowners association and Ms. Stickler. Bernard Rigolet, 2681 Crestview Drive, resident of Bayshore Community, addressed the Council and stated there are 251 homes within their area, and as of last week, only 19 property owners were in favor of undergrounding the utilities. He indicated he was neither for nor against the project until he knows the cost involved. Volume 47 - Page 291 MINUTES INDEX 13 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CRLL S November 8, 1993 • Motion All Ayes • MINUTES INDEX Undergr Ut /Dist 13 Ord 93 -24 Zoning (94) Roberta Stickler, 2671 Crestview Drive, addressed the Council and referenced her latter of opposition dated November 8, 1993. She advised that she is a single parent with three children to support, and does not have the funds to pay for the cost of reconnecting her electric services to new underground utilities. Furthermore, she does not want a lien put on her property to cover the cost. Bernard Green, resident of Bayshores, addressed the Council and in response to his questions, the Public Works Director stated that the Edison Company has informed the City that they do include the cost of the undergrounding within the easement area, as well as within the Coast Highway right -of -way. John Avies, resident of Bayshores, addressed the Council and reported that the 31 affected property owners within Bayshores Community Association, as well as their Board, were notified of the proposed Underground Utilities District No. 13 and the informational meeting conducted by staff. In addition, a petition is being circulated within their area in support of a proposed Underground Utilities District No. 50 which includes those 31 private homes. x Following discussion, motion was made by Council Member Debay to continue this public hearing to December 13, 1993, and to request that staff report back on the following: 1) the feasibility of a hardship program for specific hardship cases; 2) more detailed information relative to the cost for the work; 3) update on the status of the petition being circulated within the Bayshores area; and 4) to confirm in writing that Edison Company will in fact pay for that portion of undergrounding within the easement area. 19. Mayor Pro Tem Watt opened the public hearing regarding introduction of proposed ORDINANCE being, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING TITLE 20 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING SECTION 20.62.050 OF THE MARINERS NILE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN SO AS TO MODIFY THE RICHT -OF -WAY DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF WEST COAST HIGHWAY BETWEEN NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND THE SOUTHERLY EXPENSION OF IRVINE AVENUE; AND CHANGE THE METHOD OF Volume 47 - Page 292 INDEX Undergr Ut /Dist 13 Ord 93 -24 Zoning (94) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES %9 \%\A November 8, 1993 ROLL CRLL uai11mi7 DETERMINING ALLOWABLE BUILDING FLOOR AREA FOR PARCELS ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF WEST COAST HIGHWAY (PLANNING COMMISSION PCA 786 AMENDMENT NO. 786). Report from the Planning Department. • John Douglas, Principal Planner, referenced an aerial photo of the Mariners Mile Specific Area Plan on display, and stated that zoning regulations for this area are regulated by Mariners Mile Specific Area Plan. Coast Highway on the City's Circulation Element as well as the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways is shown as a 6 -lane Arterial Highway running through the Mariners Mile area. The City's plan calls for 112 ft. right -of -way along Coast Highway, and in most locations, its improved to 5 -lanes approximately 100 ft. wide, and therefore, there is a 12 ft. wide future dedication area on the northerly side of the road. The City's existing policy with respect to the Specific Area Plan states that any property that redevelops on the northerly side of the road must dedicate that right -of -way strip to the City at the time the redevelopment is approved. Also, the 12 ft, right -of -way strip is not included for the purposes of determining the maximum allowable floor area when the development is approved. • When the City Council initiated an amendment to the Specific Area Plan last October, there were two main provisions, 1) the setback area would be included in determining floor area ratio, and 2) the requirement to dedicate the 12 ft. strip would be deleted. Mr. Douglas stated the proposed amendment is intended to serve two major purposes. First, the proposed change in dedication requirements would remove a major obstacle to redevelopment in this area, which would encourage the upgrading of properties and stimulate the revitalization of the area; and second, the amendment would reflect current legal limitations on development exactions and property dedication requirements. An Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the amendment. . The major concern identified by staff and the public was that the amendment could cause Coast Highway right -of -way acquisition costs to be increased, which could delay the planned widening to the full 6 -lane Master Plan configuration and result in a diversion of traffic into the residential neighborhood of Newport Heights and East Costa Mesa. • During the Initial Study process, staff developed revisions to the proposed amendment that were designed to mitigate these potential impacts by minimizing the City's future right -of -way acquisition costs. These revisions were presented as mitigation measures in the Negative Declaration prepared for the amendment. Volume 47 - Page 293 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES ROLL CflLL S November 8, 1993 runry Mr. Douglas added that a public hearing Zoning was held before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1993, and a motion was adopted to deny the proposed amendment on a 5 to 1 vote, with one member absent. Subsequent to the Planning • Commission hearing, the City Attorney prepared minor suggested revisions designed to clarify the intent of the proposed amendment. These revisions do not change the substance of the proposal or require additional environmental review, and have been incorporated into the draft Ordinance. Tony Ellsworth, 3130 Clay Street, addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment. He stated he was speaking on behalf of the Newport Heights Traffic Reduction Association, and they are very concerned with diverted traffic in the Heights area. He referenced a joint Newport Beach /Costa Mesa traffic commission meeting held on June 20 of this year where over 200 concerned residents attended and were told by City staff that they only perceived there was a traffic problem in the East Costa Mesa/Newport Heights area. He urged the City Council to reconsider the proposed amendment as he felt it would allow additional diversion of traffic in the Newport Heights area. Stephen Sutherland, Co- Chairman of the • Mariners Mile Association, and a resident of Newport Heights, addressed the Council and stated he does not see a problem with traffic in the Heights as mentioned by Mr. Ellsworth. He noted that the Mariners Mile Association has been working for the last year and one- half with City staff and City Council to rectify what they have felt has been a "wrong" imposed specifically upon the property owners on the northern side of Pacific Coast Highway In Mariners Mile for the last 15 years; they have requested to be put on a level of parity with other property owners in the City inasmuch as Mariners Mile is the only area where this particular type of frontage dedication is required, and therefore, they believe the proposed amendment should be approved. He felt that if Coast Highway is widened in the future, the proposed amendment will help speed revitalization of the area. Dickson Shafer, 232 Evening Canyon Road, owner of property at 2510 and 2530 Coast Highway Bayport Yachts and Tony Roma's), addressed the Council and urged approval of the proposed amendment. Jan Vandersloot, resident of Newport • Heights, addressed the Council and stated he agreed with the remarks of Mr. Ellsworth regarding the east /west traffic problem in their neighborhood. He recommended the City Council sustain the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the proposed amendment for the Volume 47 - Page 294 COLNJCIL MEMBERS • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 reasons enumerated in the minutes of the Commission's meeting held October 7, 1993. He reminded the Council that the Commission denied the proposed amendment by a 5 to 1 vote. He felt the amendment is a "bad deal for the City and a bad policy that is not necessary." He also felt that the increased traffic in that area is why people do not frequent the businesses on Mariners Mile; that the City should look for ways to increase traffic flow through Mariners Mile such as requesting Caltrans to widen Coast Highway, and to also restripe Coast Highway to 6 -lanes in this area. Ernie Lisky, 503 32nd Street, addressed the Council in support of the proposed ordinance, indicating he felt the amendment is equitable and will benefit all the property owners in the area. Dean Reinemann, 8 Sandflower Court, addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed amendment and urged that the decision of the Planning Commission be sustained. He felt that if the amendment is approved, it will have an inhibiting factor on widening Coast Highway as well as make it more costly. Hearing no others wishing to address the Council, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Hart indicated that she has been working with the Mariners Mile Association on this matter, and that what they have been looking to is a "fair adjustment for the property owners." After working close to 18 years on this project, and if the proposed amendment is approved, the property owners will be able to put the setbacks to a profitable use and the City will be able to preserve the necessary setbacks from Coast Highway where needed. However, she is concerned that the property owners will not be able to use the additional floor area that would be permitted if the amendment is passed, and therefore, the City Attorney has prepared two minor amendments to the Mariners Mile Specific Area Plan which would give the Planning Commission and City Council the discretion to slightly modify development standards if construction of the additional floor area on site would pose a hardship to the property owner and the modification of development standards would not adversely impact the area. She presented the two amendments as follows: "20.62.030(B) (2) - PARKING SPACES. Offstreet parking spaces shall be provided as set forth in Chapter 20.30.035 of the Municipal Code, however, off - street parking for all floor area/building bulk of any structure that exceeds .5x the buildable area of the site Volume 47 - Page 295 MINUTES INDEX COUNCIL MEMBERS figAN\ k '�� ROLL CALL t • M•n • x CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 exclusive of all setbacks may be waived by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal, upon a finding there will be no adverse impact on parking in the area and the provision of the additional parking on site would create a hardship. 1120.62.050(D) (1) - The increased building height would result in more public visual open space and views than would result from compliance with the basic height limit, and that the increased building height is necessary to construct the additional floor area authorized by Section 20.63.030(B) (5). Particular attention shall be given to the location and orientation of the structure on the lot, the percentage of ground coverage, and on the treatment of all setback and open areas." Council Member Mart further requested the City Attorney to amend Chapter 13.05 of the Municipal Code (Street Improvements and Dedications) that would extend the concepts embodied in the proposed two amendments, to those properties between Rocky Point and Dover Avenue for introduction on November 22, 1993. In view of the foregoing, motion was made to introduce Ordinance No. 93 -24 and pass to second reading and adoption on November 22, 1993. The City Attorney advised that the proposed two amendments referred to in the foregoing by Council Member Hart will be brought back at the next City Council meeting for initiation and referral to the Planning Commission, inasmuch as they have not been subject to environmental review. The amendments to Chapter 13.05 will be placed on the agenda of November 22, 1993 for introduction. In response to question raised by Council Member Watt, the City Attorney stated that the City has an appraiser who stated that if this ordinance is implemented, it will in affect, reduce the cost of acquiring the area that is currently setback. What the proposed amendments will do is two things, 1) they conform our dedication requirements to law and current legal standards, and 2) reduce the cost of acquiring the right -of -way because the property owner will be allowed to transfer the development rights off that portion that is currently setback onto the main developable area of the parcel so that the property owner is actually getting some substantial portion of the actual value of the setback by that right to transfer those development rights north of the setback line. Volume 47 - Page 296 MINUTES Zoning COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CRLL s • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH o� n % November 8, 1993 Ayes Noes Ix Ix IX I Ix Ix Ix • 0 Also in response to comments of Council Member Watt, the Planning Director stated he did not believe the Planning Commission was convinced that the proposed amendments would lover the value of the property and for that reason, one of the Commissioner's suggested that perhaps the City should obtain the opinion of two additional appraisers, but in the final analysis, they decided to reject the entire proposal. With regard to the suggestion to restripe this area of Coast Highway, the Public Works Director advised that the Coastal Commission has stated that no parking can be eliminated in this area without a one -to -one replacement. Following consideration, the motion made by Council Member Hart was voted on and carried. 20. Mayor Pro Tem Watt opened the public hearing regarding: A. SITS 17AN REVIEW NO. 66 - Request to approve a site plan review by APPLICANT NANNING COMPANY so as to allow the construction of 12 detached single family dwellings on property located at 2001 Newport Hills Drive West, on the northwesterly side of Newport Hills Drive West, between Port Wheeler Place and Port Stanhope Place in the Harbor View Hills Planned Community. The proposal also includes a modification to the Harbor View Hills Planned Community District Regulations, so as to allow the construction of a sound wall along the exterior perimeter of the proposed development, portions of which exceed 8 feet in height, up to a maximum 10 feet 6 inches; and B. TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 14533 - Request to subdivide 9.2 acres of land into 12 numbered lots for single family residential development for a public park site, 1 lettered lot for public landscape purposes and 1 lettered lot for future MacArthur Boulevard right -of- way, in the Harbor View Hills Planned Community. Report from the Planning Department. Letter of concern from the Committee for the Preservation of the Newport Hills View. The Planning Director summarized the request to subdivide 9.2 acres of land into 12 numbered lots for single family residential development and 9 lettered lots in Newport Hills. He noted that Lots A -F are for landscape purposes adjacent to Newport Hills Drive; Lot G is a 1/2 acre park site; Lot H is a manufactured slope area behind the 12 homes, and Lot I is for future right -of- way for the widening of MacArthur Boulevard. This site is one Volume 47 - Page 297 MINUTES INDEX e Pln Rv TenMp 14533 COUNCIL MEMBERS L XLXN • • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 of 12 sites that were entitled by the Circulation and Open Space Agreement between the City and The Irvine Company approved earlier this year. Development Standards are contained in the Planned Community Development Plan for Newport Hills which was approved by the City at the same time as the CIOSA Agreement. The Planned Community Development Plan further specifies that the southerly site (Site 16), will be subject to site plan review for the purposes of demonstrating the location and layout of the proposed homes will adequately buffer existing homes on Newport Hills Drive from the incremental increase in noise that will occur with the widening of MacArthur Boulevard. Also, attached to the staff report is a noise study which was prepared for this subdivision and is located on handwritten page 72. The Planning Director noted that the issues which were raised at the Planning Commission meeting when the two public hearings were held on this proposal were as follows: Cul -de -sac design and the interface of the proposed street layout with the existing circulation system in Harbor View. 2. Proposed street scape along Newport Hills Drive. Pad elevations and the location and massing of the proposed homes on the new lots, proposed setbacks from Newport Hills Drive, and how they interface with existing homes and setbacks in Harbor View. 4. The need and desirability for the 1/2 acre park site. Dedication of portions of Lot H (Manufactured Slope adjacent to MacArthur Boulevard and the alternatives thereto - Condition of Approval 42, Options 1 and 2). 6. Views from Newport Hills Drive (addressed in the staff report). The Planning Director further reported that on September 23, 1993, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter and continued it for the purposes of asking the applicant to float some balloons along the site to show what the elevations of the building would be in terms of their eave lines and how they would relate to the view situation along Newport Hills Drive. Also, there was the street scape exhibit showing the elevations of each of the structures and the landscaping as it would appear along Volume 47 - Page 298 MINUTES Site Pln Rv 66 /TenMp Tr 14533 COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CRLL • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES � \ %\ November 8, 1993 INDEX Newport Hills Drive. On October 7, Site Pln Rv 1993, the Planning Commission approved 66 /TenMp the site plan review and the tentative Tr 14533 map, subject to the findings and conditions that are set forth in the minutes of that meeting by a vote of 5 ayes and 2 members absent. Since that action, the City Council has received a request from adjoining neighbors that the subdivision be redesigned and shifted to the north. With respect to the issue of park dedication, he pointed out that there is not a park shown in this particular area of the General Plan; therefore, the subdivider would not be required by the City to dedicate land for a park, nor would he be required to pay an in -lieu fee. However, as part of the CIOSA Agreement, there are 17.3 acres of open space that are to be dedicated in this area in conjunction with this development designated as Area 16, as well as another area to the north designated as Area 17. Jim Manning, Applicant, gave an overview of the project as currently planned, and outlined the compromises made over the last two years from input within the community. In part, he pointed out the following: the property is built around 3 cul -de -sacs, which minimize the access onto Newport Hills Drive which was one of the early desires of the community; lots range from approximately 8,900 sq. ft. to 17,000 sq. ft.; all the homes are two- stories and there are 4 homes on each cul -de -sac; there is a City 1/2 acre park site at the northerly end of the development which will have a view into Big Canyon; there will be permanent landscaping installed on the slope that goes all along the site on the westerly edge which wraps to the south and north; the site is surrounded on all sides by a wall that varys along Newport Hills Road which is 6 to 8 ft. high in some locations; the homes along Newport Hills Road have been setback with additional landscaped barriers; the wall design along Newport Hills Drive will match the design currently at the site; the architecture will blend with the existing community; and the pad grades are in the same harmony and approximately same elevation with existing pad grades across the street. He also addressed the issue of shifting the subdivision to the north as requested by adjoining neighbors. In conclusion, he stated they feel they have satisfied the major concerns of the community. Stephen Bonn, 1801 Port Stanhope Place, representing the Committee for the Preservation of the Newport Hills View, addressed the Council and requested that the development be relocated approximately 100 feet to the north so that its southern boundary does not extend beyond Port Stanhope Place. The view they are concerned about is from Port Stanhope Place to Port Hemley Volume 47 - Page 299 COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CHLL s • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 Circle. They also conducted a mail survey within the neighborhood in which 30% of the property owners to date are in opposition to the extension beyond Port Stanhope Place. As a result of the Manning Company in an effort of resolving issues not acceptable to the community in the early stages, the southern boundary of the project was made to extend significantly beyond Port Stanhope Place, which will result in complete obliteration of the view they led the residents to believe would be preserved. This apparently was necessary in order to provide for a park at the north end of the project which will be approximately 80 feet deep and 110 feet long along Newport Hills Drive West. With regard to the proposed park, Mr. Bonn stated their Committee feels it is completely illogical and an unnecessary luxury for the reasons outlined in their letter to the City Council. Members of their Committee attended the Planning Commission public hearings on September 23 and October 7, and presentations were made by a few members in an effort to defend preservation of the view. They felt the Planning Commission took the position that this was a private view as opposed to a public view and would not consider the subject of view any further. In the opinion of their Committee, 1) the Planning Commission wanted nothing to interfere with their acceptance of the site plan, 2) they were not given their "day in court ", 3) they created the terms public versus private view and were unable to explain what they were and made an adverse decision before they could define the terms, and 4) the Committee members who spoke were treated in an adversarial, discourteous and rude manner and not as residents of Newport Beach coming to their representatives to be heard and plead their cause. Maybert Davis, 1801 Port Tiffin Place, addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed development, and read into the record a prepared statement which stated, in part: "When they purchased their property in 1971, they were told that the vacant land between MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Hills Drive West belonged to the State as a freeway right -of -way and buffer zone for the residents of Harbor View homes. They were also told that no homes would ever be built upon that land, and they were never advised to the contrary until they received notification from the Manning Company in December 1990. There are 1200 dwellings within their subdivision and for more than two decades the public has had a magnificent view Volume 47 - Page 300 MINUTES Site Pln R1 66 /TenMp Tr 14533 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES gg,, �o ``s����9s November 8, 1993 ROLL CRLL Tnmry of Newport Center, etc. It is the Site Pln Ri intention of the Manning Company 66 /TenMp to fill in that canyon so as to Tr 14533 construct a cul -de -sac upon which to build four large two story homes. Those homes will totally obliterate the public view from • that intersection and pass that view onto the four new homebuyers in that development. Filling in the canyon and obliterating the public view would appear to be in violation of the City Municipal Code Section 20.01.070. They are not opposed to the proposed development in its entirety, however, they are opposed to the usurping of the public view at Port Stanhope and Newport Hills Drive West for the benefit of the developer and the four new home buyers. She also submitted four photographs showing the balloons that were placed by the Manning Company to designate the heights of the dwellings contemplated at the site, and stated it is obvious the structures will obliterate views." John Della Grotta, 1939 Port Bishop Place, President, Newport Hills Community Association, addressed the Council and stated their Association has determined that there is no legal reason to oppose the proposed development. He • complimented the Manning and Irvine Companies for their cooperation throughout the planning process, and stated they felt this project is compatible with the present use; they support the 1/2 acre park, and are pleased with the design of the project. Mitchell K. Brown, 1979 Port Cardigan Place, addressed the Council in support of the proposed project. He stated that as a result of a number of town hall meetings within their community, residents concerns were addressed regarding architectural compatibility, views, landscaping, walls, street access, etc., and compromises were made. However, he would like to see the map conditions require future owners to pay for incremental cost of the new slopes and walls. He also felt that having cul -de -sacs directly opposite the existing streets will create a safe traffic movement in and out of the new homes. In closing, he commended the applicant as well as all those who participated in the planning and design of the development. Following discussion with Mr. Manning • regarding various items, the City Attorney recommended that an additional finding be adopted which would solve one concern of The Irvine Company as it relates to the amount of open space they are required to dedicate on the site. The Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement (CIOSA) requires 17.3 acres of open space on freeway Volume 47 - Page 301 COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 MINUTES Volume 47 - Page 302 INDEX Site Pln Ri 66 /TenMp Tr 14533 reservation east, and if this slope area in question doesn't count towards their dedication requirements, it will reduce the developable area on the north end of the site. Therefore, he recommended approval of the following additional finding: "That the private open space within Lot H be considered as open space when Calculated in dedication requirements for freeway reservation east in the CIOSA." He stated this finding would be in conjunction with approval of the map. The Public Works Director pointed out that Lot H is the graded common slope between the back of the lots and future MacArthur Boulevard right -of -way, and is a standard graded subdivision slope. In response to question raised regarding the maintenance of the proposed park, the City Manager indicated that if the park site is approved, the City will find the funds to maintain it. Tom Redwi.tz of The Irvine Company, addressed the Council and stated that the proposed park is not a requirement of the development, however, they are required to dedicate open space per CIOSA. The park site is within the area identified to be dedicated to the City already, and the City is getting the park as past of this project landscaped. With respect to Condition No. 42, they are in agreement with the staff's recommendation, and with the specific • language included in the additional finding suggested by the City Attorney that this be included in the acreage calculation under the terms of CIOSA. The area is question is Lot 0, and is identified in the PC Text as open space to be included in the open space acreage. In response to question raised regarding slope liability on the part of the City, the City Attorney responded the City would not be liable. Maybert Davis addressed the Council again and indicated that the homeowners in their area have not been kept informed relative to this development as stated by Mr. Della Crotta. Also, the lots in Harbor View Homes average 5,000 sq. ft., whereas the Manning lots will have 10,000 sq. ft.; their homes average 1400 to 2385 sq. ft. and the proposed homes will be between 3400 and 3800 sq. ft. She stated she felt the size of the Manning homes should be reduced. Hearing no others wishing to address the Council, the public hearing was closed. M n x Notion was made by Council Member Cox to Al yes sustain the decision of the Planning Commission; approving Option 1 of Condition No. 42 as recommended by staff, and adopting the additional finding suggested by the City Attorney enumerated in the foregoing. Volume 47 - Page 302 INDEX Site Pln Ri 66 /TenMp Tr 14533 COUNCIL MEMBERS *0V1411%0\A1`1\& • Motion All Ayes • X CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES November 8, 1993 1 111' 1 21. Mayor Pro Tem Watt opened the public DBG /CHAS hearing regarding COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (87) BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY (CHAS) FOR FY 1994. Report from the Planning Department. Craig Bluell, Principal Planner, summarized his report wherein it was noted that normally a CHAS covers a five year period, however, HUD is waiving this five year period because the Department expects to issue substantial rule changes that will alter the CHAS and consolidate and streamline planning requirements into one document. Because of these changes to the CHAS, HUD has given jurisdictions the option of submitting a CHAS covering only a one year period. He discussed the review and comment period and stated that a public notice requesting comments on the content of the 1994 CHAS was published in the newspaper. To prepare this CHAS, he stated that staff has updated the data contained in the CHAS from the 1980 Census data to the 1990 Census data. Robert R. Weber, 420 Heliotrope Avenue, addressed the Council and stated he was an affordable housing advocate for the Orange County Homeless Issues Task Force. He stated he supports and endorses this particular CHAS and felt it was an excellent document; he also was pleased to see that the document is in conformance with the City's Housing Element and that it contains very clear - cut goals that are consistent with what is characteristic with the community. He also complimented the staff for their work on this program , and to the City Council for establishing the guidelines which have made a significant difference in making, the City an outstanding example in Orange County. Hearing no others wishing to address the Council, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Council Member Hart to authorize the City Manager to submit the 1994 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as required, to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR A¢enda Item No. 1. Report from the City Attorney regarding Ord 93 -22 proposed ORDINANCE N0. 93 -22, being, Muni Code Citations/ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Warrants OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH (53) AMENDING CHAPTER 1.12, SECTION 1.12.020 ALLOWING ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS TO ENFORCE FISH AND CANE CODE VIOLATIONS. Volume 47 - Page 303 COUNCIL MEMBERS ROLL CALL�s��� n Ayes • • X CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 The City Attorney recommended the subject Ordinance be revised to add the Marine Department to the Animal Control Officer section inasmuch as they monitor the Corona del Mar Marine Refuge and this would allow them to enforce Fish & Game code provisions. Notion was made to introduce Ordinance No. 93 -22 as revised, and pass to second reading on November 22, 1993. Report from the Public Works Department regarding Resolution No. 93 -76, requesting the County of Orange to initiate the process to evaluate the impacts to the circulation system of removing the 19th STREET /BANNING AVENUE AND GISLER AVENUE /CARFIELD AVENUE BRIDGES across the Santa Ana River from the MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS (MPAH); AND Resolution No. 93 -77, requesting the Orange County Board of Supervisors to initiate the process to DOWNGRADE ON THE MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS the classification of DOVER DRIVE BETWEEN IRVINE AVENUE AND WESTCLIFF DRIVE FROM A PRIMARY ARTERIAL TO A COMMUTER ARTERIAL; AND also supporting the Orange County Planning Commission recommendation to DOWNGRADE EAST 19TH STREET BETWEEN NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND IRVINE AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA TO A COMMUTER ARTERIAL. Council Member Sansone vacated his seat at this time due to a conflict of interest. Don Webb, City Engineer, stated that for approximately the last two years he has worked with the County and the cities of Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach on the Santa Ana River Study Crossing (SARK). The City Council received results of that study on October 25, 1993. Mr. Webb outlined some of the staff's major concerns relative to the various elements of the study wherein it was noted, in part, that if the two bridges (19th Street /Banning Avenue, and Gisler Avenue /Garfield Avenue) in the City of Costa Mesa are removed from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways, Coast Highway westerly of Superior Avenue is projected to have an additional 11,000 trips per day. To provide an acceptable level of service in West Newport, this added volume will require a widening of Coast Highway to 7 or 8 lanes. The deletion of these crossings over the Santa Ana River will impact intersections, existing bridge crossings and roadway links in four cities and the unincorporated County area. Mr. Webb recommended that the proposed resolutions set forth above be adopted. Volume 47 - Page 304 MINUTES INDEX PW /MPAH (74) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES �,'s� ��� ��f �9A November 8, 1993 ROLL CRLL TK]nrY In response to questions raised by PW /MPAH Council Member Hart, Mr. Webb stated that 17th Street in Costa Mesa is supposed to be widened to 6 lanes. The land uses of all four cities will be looked at in the future study to determine what down zoning may have to • be done in order to accomplish removal of the 19th Street bridge. Council Member Debay advised that she had been asked to sit on the four -city committee to study this issue and attended the first meeting. She came away from that meeting very concerned what Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach are trying to do prematurely. She felt strongly that a large percentage of traffic that was referenced at the meeting is circulating between Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa, and if the bridges are not built, then what happens is that traffic has to route either around the southern end or the northern end to get where they are going. The study shows that the largest destination is either the 55 freeway or the west side of Costa Mesa. As a result, there will be a terrific impact on West Newport and she was told that if the bridges are deleted, not only does Coast Highway have to be widened, but property needs to be taken on either the southern or northern side of Coast Highway, which means the business section through West Newport on the • northern side, or the homes and the park that developed was just on the southern side. This also does not seem to be something that Costa Mesa is considering. In addition, the bridge that was just completed over the Santa Ana River and Coast Highway will no longer be wide enough to accommodate a widened Coast Highway. In essence, the new bridge would have to be torn up to accommodate Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach. She felt the residents of Newport Beach should be made aware of what is being discussed so that they can be heard. She stated that alot of misinformation is being circulated to the residents on East 19th Street that makes them think that their street is going to be a major thoroughfare, which is not true, and the people on Dover Drive have been told that their street will become a four -lane speedway which is also not true. She felt it was necessary for cities to carry their own fare share of their local traffic and not ask to have it pushed into neighboring cities. Peter Tarr, 5023 Lido Sands Drive, addressed the Council and spoke in • support of the two bridges, and stated that if they are not built, it will cost taxpayers an additional 27 million dollars above and beyond the cost of the unbuilt bridges. The bridges will be used from the four city area, and he felt there was not an acceptable alternative to building the 19th Street bridge. Volume 47 - Page 305 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS A November 8, 1993 ROLL C 'P Ayes x x x x x Motion x Aj♦ained x MINUTES Larry Cavenah, 12 Starburst Court, PW /MPAH addressed the Council in support of removing the 19th Street bridge and put the money to good use in another area. He felt that if the bridge were built, it would have a significant impact on the environment. Nancy Olenick, 1720 Skylark Lane, addressed the Council and stated she was speaking on behalf of over 200 parents of the Mariners' Elementary students and others, requesting that the 19th Street bridge and the widening of Dover Drive be deleted from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. If constructed, she cited a number of ways they felt they would be impacted. Vincent Bellone, 7 Latitude Court, Member of Newport Terrace Condominium Association, addressed the Council and spoke in support of deleting the 19th Street bridge as he felt it would not only be an "eyesore," but also lessen the property values in the area. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, addressed the Council and discussed various traffic impediments throughout the City. He also suggested the City keep the road system as presently exists. Roy Pasarek, Chairman of the Costa Mesa Bridge Alternative Study Committee, addressed the Council and stated that on east and west 19th Street, there would be approximately 120 people who would lose their homes, and 20 feet of their frontage property if the bridge is constructed; approximately 3,000 children would be negatively impacted if the two bridges were built; Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach are working together, and he would hope that Newport Beach joins the "band wagon" to come up with a workable solution. He strongly believes the bridges are not needed, and if it takes lowering densities to preserve quality of life, then all four cities should look at that issue to improve regional and local traffic. George F. Rombach, 2009 Centella Place, addressed the Council and stated that he was fundamentally in support of retaining the bridges, but he also agrees with Council Member Debay regarding misinformation. He felt a well- informed citizenry is important in this issue in order to come to a good decision in the overall concept. Motion was made by Council Member Debay to adopt Resolution Nos. 93 -76 and 93 -77 Res 93 -76 as presented by'staff in the foregoing. Res 93 -77 Council Member Sansone resumed his seat at this time. Volume 47 - Page 306 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES � n s f November 8, 1993 ROLL CRLL 10. Report from the Planning Department transmitting PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS OF OCTOBER 21, 1993. Motion x Motion was made to schedule public All Ayes on permit H • . 3387December nd to receive and file remaining actions. 12. Report from the Public Works Department regarding approval of plans and specifications for the MEASURE N STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. 2928). Motion x Notion was made to refer this item back All Ayes to staff for revisions as recommended. 15. Report from the Public Works Department regarding Encroachment Agreement for 1200 SOUTH BAY FRONT, Balboa Island. Motion x Notion was made to continue this item to All Ayes November 22, 1993, as requested by Brion Jeannette, architect for the applicant. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Charles Gabbard, 436 Heliotrope Avenue, addressed the Council and complimented the Newport Beach Fire Department for their efforts during the recent Laguna Beach fire. He stated that he has a water truck and also assisted in the fire at the mobilehome park, and as a • result, he has a new admiration and respect for the Fire Department. He also complimented The Irvine Company on the new Newport Coast Road, the green belt area and new construction adjacent thereto, which he felt kept the fire from Corona del Mar. 2. Ron Hendrickson, representing Newport Taxpayers Alliance Against Measure A, addressed the Council and reported that Measure A was defeated by a 43% vote. He felt that had there been a public information period as requested, and a poll taken, it Would have been determined that there was not sufficient support for the open space purchase, and therefore, no election would have been necessary, and the City would have been spared a lot of pain. He requested the City Council clarify what agreement exists with the Newport Conservancy for payment of the November 2, 1993 election which is estimated at $60,000. 3. George F. Rombach, 2009 Centella Place, addressed the Council regarding his opinion of the future of Orange County's airport facilities and the City's position. He felt the additional commercial air service in the County is • vital to growth and future prosperity and he supports that expansion, however, he is opposed to the expansion occurring at John Wayne Airport because it lacks the facility and resources, and due to the impact it will have on residents of Newport Beach. He spoke in support of Volume 47 - Page 307 Planning (68) Measure M St Rehab C -2928 (38) Encroachm Agm /1200 SBay Fr (65) Fire Measure A O/C-John Wayne Arpr ROLL CALL • Motion All Aye COUNCIL MEMBERS X CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a \ *\%\ November 8, 1993 MINUTES using E1 Toro Marine Base for an airport facility, and stated if there is no second airport expansion, then it looks as if John Wayne Airport will be expanded, and he is opposed to this. He indicated he felt the City of Newport Beach should have "more of a say" in this matter inasmuch as this is a County -wide issue and Newport Beach should have the same equal vote as the City of Irvine. He felt the City of Newport Beach should have control over the growth of John Wayne Airport, by annexation or otherwise, and does not think the City should "wait and see" what happens. 4. Gary Hunt, Executive Vice President, The TIC /Laguna Irvine Company, addressed the Council Beach Fire and gave an update on the activities their company undertook during the Laguna Beach fire relative to providing food, clothing, lodging, etc. to the fire victims. He also stated that The Irvine Company donated $250,000, along with an additional $150,000 raised through various donations, and matched the $400,000 challenge grant given to the American Red Cross by an anonymous donor. He stated the fuel modification plan that was developed by The Irvine Company, Orange County Fire Department and Newport Beach's Fire Chief basically stopped the fire around all of the homes close to Newport Coast; however, most of the 6600 acres of open space owned by The Irvine Company southern reserve was destroyed, and the lands contained very sensitive natural resources. In addition, they are in the process of working with the City Fire Department to determine the best method of brush clearance in Buck Gully that is under their ownership. In closing, he commended the City's Fire and Police Departments for their outstanding and credible jobs they performed during the fire. CONTINUED BUSINESS 22. BICYCLE TRAILS CITIZENS ADVISORY BT /CAC COMMITTEE VACANCY. Motion was made by Council Member Watt to confirm (District 5) appointment of Marianne Whitby to fill the unexpired term of Dorothy Beek ending December 31, 1993. CURRENT BUSINESS 23. Proposed resolution directing the Fire Fire Chief to take appropriate action to (41) SUPPRESS AND CONTROL HAZARDOUS FIRE AREAS. The City Clark advised that after the agenda was printed, a letter was received from Tom and Trish Rattray, 1505 Sandcastle Drive, in support of the proposed resolution. Volume 47 - Page 308 COUNCIL MEMBERS 1\ CALL • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November S. 1993 Fire Chief Tim Riley described the events that have taken place during the past two weeks relative to the Laguna Beach fire. He summarized the contents Of the proposed resolution and stated it is essential to public safety in the City, and upholds the authority given to the Fire Chief through the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code to order the abatement of hazardous conditions in the City's wild land areas, etc. He stated his department will work with all affected property owners regarding brush clearance and the fuel modification program to assure compliance. Chief Riley announced that a special community meeting will be held on November 16 at 7 p.m., at the Oasis Senior Center in Corona del Mar regarding the details and importance of the brush clearance program, and all interested property owners are invited to attend. Haskell Shapiro, 287 Evening Canyon, addressed the Council and stated he was a resident of the Shorecliffs area which borders on Buck Gully. He stated that the areas of Morning Canyon and Buck Gully between Coast Highway and the Ocean, constitute a somewhat different environment than the areas that burned in the recent fire, and he is somewhat concerned that the Fire Department will have absolute authority to tell the residents whose homes border the canyons, what specifically they will have to clear at the homeowners expense. He stated that the estimates received some years ago for brush clearance was very expensive in some cases and he felt it was not cost effective. Yvonne Houssels, President of Harbor View Hills Homeowners Association South, addressed the Council and urged that the proposed resolution be adopted. They are pleased to hear that The Irvine Company has initiated a weed abatement program on Sandcastle; in addition, residents along Sandcastle are requesting removal of the City's tall Eucalyptus trees in front of their homes as it is felt they are a fire hazard; they are also requesting that smoke prohibition signs be placed along Buck Gully as well as No Trespassing signs, and they are also opposed to a public hiking trail in Buck Gully. Their association would also like to see the City enact an ordinance which would prohibit shake roofs in communities where homes are adjacent to wilderness areas. In closing, she urged the Council to adopt the proposed resolution. Volume 47 - Page 309 MINUTES ire COUNCIL MEMBERS MR010MMA • M n AlAyes x CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 8, 1993 Richard Haskell, 1508 Ruth Lane, addressed the Council in support of the proposed resolution, and stated he will soon be a resident of the Shorecliffs area. He stated he has friends who lost their home in the Oakland fire and the conditions are very similar to that in Buck Gully. He suggested that in the future all Class A, B or C roofs be included in all new construction or remodeling or within 5 years whichever comes first, and that the City remove all flammable, non - native vegetation trees from the Gully. George Parker, 3407 Seabreeze Lane, addressed the Council and discussed the severity of the fire hazards in Buck Gully due to vegetation, and the fire access to the Gully. He also complimented the Fire Department for their participation and assistance in the recent fires. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, also addressed the Council in support of the proposed resolution, and stated it is imperative that the brush in Buck Gully be removed. Teri Daves, 2015 Yacht Vindes, addressed the Council regarding the brush that needs to be removed and the trees that used to be pruned in Mission Canyon in the Seaview area. She also urged the proposed resolution be adopted. Hearing no other comments, motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 93 -79 directing the Fire Chief to take appropriate action to suppress and control hazardous fire areas. Meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m. The agenda for this meeting was posted on November 4 at 8:15 a.m.; and the supplemental agenda was posted on November 5 at 1:00 p.m.. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. ATTEST: Volume 47 - Pal MINUTES Fire Res 93 -79