Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/09/2010 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes City Council Study Session November 9, 2010 — 3:30 p.m. I. II. ROLL CALL Present: Council Member Selich, Council Member Rosansky, Mayor Pro Tern Henn, Mayor Curry, Council Member Webb, Council Member Gardner, Council Member Daigle CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. In response to Mayor Pro tem Henn's question regarding Item S15 (Proposed Association of Orange County Cities), City Manager Kiff clarified that there is not a significant increase in the membership fees and noted that there is a chance that they may decrease. 2. LEAF BLOWER SURVEY RESULTS. Project Analyst Bunting utilized a PowerPoint presentation that included the results from the landscape company survey, homeowner association survey, and the resident and business survey. He discussed the cost estimates and alternatives. In response to Council questions, Project Analyst Bunting stated that half of the surveys were completed by the management companies and the other half were completed by the homeowner associations (HOAs), noted that the current proposal does not include parks, stated that residents seemed to be more concerned about gas powered leaf blowers than electric, and added that other city information has been included. City Attorney Hunt clarified that the proposed ordinance will supersede HOA CC &Rs. Council Member Daigle believed that leaf blower bans should be handled by the the HOA's governance structure instead of the City. City Attorney Hunt stated that the ordinance can be written to state that if there is an accepted and identified HOA that has effective CC &Rs, the City's ordinance will not apply. The other option is to have the HOA regulate the ban separately. In response to W.R. Dildine's question, Projects Analyst Bunting stated that vacuums are currently excluded from the ordinance. Hunter Cook expressed concern about the sound impact, believed that the City is giving more concern to the maintenance companies instead of the residents, and recommended that Council adopt a full ban. Frank Hughes asked Council to consider Alternative 1 Dan Brusal believed that vacuums and leaf blowers have the same noise impact Council Member Gardner believed that the ordinance should not be enforced Citywide, asked staff to come back to Council with a proposal for a ban in certain areas, and suggested that the vacuum issue be referred to the Environmental Quality Affairs Volume 59 - Page 618 City of Newport Beach City Council Study Session November 9, 2010 Committee (EQAC). Mayor Pro Tem Henn believed that HOAs should have the power to decide for themselves on the leafblower issue, suggested that the ban include both electric and gas powered leafblowers, and stated that vacuums should be allowed. Council Member Rosansky expressed support for allowing HOAs the ability to decide on banning leafblowers in their area, stated that HOAs should be allowed six months to decide if they would like to opt -in or opt -out of the ban, and believed that the vacuum issue should be referred to EQAC. Mayor Curry expressed support for the opt - in/opt -out option, stated that the leafblower issue in Corona del Mar should be addressed, stated that staff should decide if commercial areas and Fashion Island should be excluded from the ban, and agreed that the vacuums are less impactful. Council agreed that City parks should not be included in the City's ordinance. City Manager Kiff clarified that Council direction is that the ordinance include a Citywide ban in residential areas; HOAs can agree to opt -out of the Citywide ban; the ban will apply to gas and electric blowers; vacuums will be excluded from the ban; commercial areas, City parks, and medians will be excluded from the ban; and a phase -in period will be implemented. Mayor Pro Tem Henn suggested that when the HOAs are contacted, it should be directly to the governance structure. City Attorney Hunt suggested that the City not get involved in HOA internal regulations and that the ordinance include that HOAs will not be subject to the ban if it does not take an action. 3. CITYWIDE SPEED SURVEY UPDATE. Public Works Director Badum utilized a PowerPoint presentation that included the need and purpose for the survey, why and how speed limits are set, and highlighted maps, the survey results, and the City's next steps. In response to Council Member Gardner's question, Police Captain Johnson stated that the City needs to have a current survey with a speed limit to match. Council Member Gardner expressed concern that every time the speed limit is raised, it allows for more public safety concerns. In response to Council Member Webb's question, Police Chief Johnson stated that the officers primarily use laser /radar guns to determine vehicle speed instead of pacing vehicles. In response to Council Member Rosansky's question, Public Works Director Badum stated that it is common for drivers to drive at a speed they are comfortable with. He noted that staff is open to looking at creative solutions for traffic calming in certain areas. In response to Council questions, Public Works Director Badum stated that he will have staff further evaluate the streets that Council is concerned with. He stated that the guidelines come from Caltrans and are approved by California legislature and the Volume 59 - Page 619 City of Newport Beach City Council Study Session November 9, 2010 Transportation Commission and added that the City's recommendations can be changed at any time, especially if conditions change. Council Member Webb expressed concern about Riverside Avenue's speed limit. Mayor Curry stated that when the State sets speed limits, it takes control away from local government. In response to Council Member Selich's question, Police Chief Johnson stated that 33 speeding tickets were issued on Bayside Drive over the last five years. 4. 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES, 2010 FIRE CODE AND THE 2009 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE. Interim Community Services Director Fick and Fire Marshal Gamble utilized a PowerPoint presentation that included the purpose for the new California Building Code, local adoption process, City Council options, what are the new codes, proposed revision to the Newport Beach Municipal Code, how the new codes affect projects that are presently in process, noteworthy 2010 California Code requirements, proposed amendments, the Green Building Standards Code, 69 total local amendment changes to the Fire Code, recommendations, and the special fire protection area map. Council Member Selich expressed support for staffs recommendation and believed that more input is needed before adoption. Mayor Curry agreed that user group feedback is needed. In response to Council Member Daigle's question, Fire Marshal Gamble stated that there are 13 new amendments to the Fire Code. W.R. Dildine expressed support for adopting the Building Code and suggested that the Building and Fire Board of Appeals be involved in the process. 5. MOORING ISSUES. City Manager Kiff utilized a PowerPoint presentation that included the Ad Hoc Committee Work Plan, information not under Committee purview, the Newport Harbor Moorings, the Orange County Grand Jury findings, Committee principles, rate proposal, how affordable are moorings, moorings after purchase, transfers, Committee recommendations, rate suggestions, ratio in other areas, proposed Newport Harbor Marina Index, revenue comparisons, cost comparisons, Harbor costs and revenues, total Harbor expenditure, Harbor revenues, net surplus, costs to be determined, direction to staff, and photos. In response to Council Member Daigle's questions, City Manager Kiff explained why harbor fees have not been raised since 1996, discussed annual fee adjustments, and discussed fee transferability. Council Member Selich explained the transfer methodology. Mayor Pro Tem Henn discussed the net deficit of Harbor Tidelands revenues versus projected Harbor Tidelands expenses, and assured harbor users that they will be asked to pay only their fair share towards the support of the harbor. In response to Council Member Webb's question, City Manager Kiff explained transferability between family members, but stated that the definition of "family member" will need to be defined. Volume 59 - Page 620 City of Newport Beach City Council Study Session November 9, 2010 Chip Donnelly and Patricia Newton, Newport Mooring Association (NMA), utilized a PowerPoint presentation that included the Harbor Mooring fees, a budgetary analysis, transferability, the transferability document, and their recommendations. Dan Gribble expressed concern about the transferability process. Bill Moses thanked City Manager Kiff for his hard work and expressed concern that the issue has not been afforded due consideration by Council. John Fratkin expressed concern that the proposal is not fair, reasonable, and legally dispensable. Greg Hatton outlined issues with the proposal and discussed alternatives. John Beady read an article from the October 8, 2010, Independent and discussed moorings versus berthing. Gary Reasoner expressed concern about fair fees and inquired about tackle reimbursement upon transferability. John Heffernan suggested that the City look at private pier permits and believed that a transition period should be utilized. Sherman Stacy expressed concern about charges for moorings that cannot be used all the time, urged Council to not eliminate the ability to transfer moorings, and noted that no services are associated with moorings. Jim Mahoney discussed onshore moorings and inquired about the rate difference paid by homeowners. Jim Benson urged Council to take the citizens into consideration. John Yeamons expressed concern that the bay needs to be dredged. Dan Rudder expressed concern about the amount of the increase and believed that the mooring fees should be affordable. Council Member Gardner suggested that this issue be continued to allow for more discussion. She added that there is a need to link the philosophy and rationale in order to explain some of the numbers in the proposal. Mayor Pro Tern Henn stated that fair market value needs to be established in order to be able to say that each kind of harbor user is paying his fair share. He noted that the existing system for pricing moorings is, in effect, a fair market value system for moorings, but that is not in fact a low cost system. He discussed fair market value and how mooring users are creating private value from a public asset. He believed that the current transferability system is only accessible to those with enough money to write a big upfront check, and that the current wait list procedure is completely disfunctional. He noted that the City is trying to provide mitigation by switching to a new system through the allowance of a transfer for a certain period of time, and agreed that the item should be brought back at another meeting. City Attorney Hunt explained that it is not possible for an individual to accrue private value through public property. Mayor Curry agreed that the item should be brought back for more public discussion at the Volume 59 - Page 621 City of Newport Beach City Council Study Session November 9, 2010 November 23, 2010, meeting. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None IV. ADJOURNMENT - 6:00 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on November 3, 2010, at 2:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Mayor Volume 59 - Page 622