Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Minutes of 9-13-1999September 27, 1999 Agenda Item No. 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes ®���I Study Session September 13, 1999 - 4:00 p.m. INDEX Present: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Ridgeway, Debay, Noyes Absent: Mayor O'Neil CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. No items were discussed. 2. GREEN ACRES PROJECT UPDATE. Public Works Director Webb stated that the City has been involved in this project for a number of years and there are one or two action items that will be on the September 271h agenda for Council consideration. Utilities Engineer Mike Sinacori recognized Steve Conklin, Director of . Engineering and Associate General Manager for the Orange County Water District (OCWD), and indicated that Mr. Conklin can answer any specific questions on their efforts over the past three years. The proposed expansion for the Green Acres project was planned in the late 198Ys and Council executed an agreement in the early 199Us to bring the reclaimed water into Newport Beach. Mr. Sinacori stated that the proposed Phase I expansion into Newport Beach in 1995 was actually deemed a low - priority project by the OCWD when they reconsidered their finances, looked at their overall system and the cost of the project. In 1996 the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) proposed discharging reclaimed water into the Upper Newport Bay. It was that proposal that led to the three -party intertie agreement between the City, OCWD and IRWD, which was signed in July of 1996. Referring to the exhibits displayed, Mr. Sinacori provided an explanation of the Intertie project. He noted that the central part of the system came on line in 1991, and serves the cities of Fountain Valley, Santa Ana and Costa Mesa. The expansion project to the south (Newport Beach) and to the west (Huntington Beach) cost $16 million total. The Intertie agreement was to take the excess water that IRWD was going to dump into the Upper Newport Bay and utilize it for four months out of the year in the Green Acres system. The excess water would get discharged through the Sanitation District's facility and their outfall. It took another 1 to 1 -1/2 years to build the other facilities. The total money spent on transmission mains was about $4 million plus $2 million from IRWD. Prior to starting any of the work the City was obligated to have end -user agreements in place with the major users that the system was going to provide water for. The • five end -users are the Newport -Mesa School District, Big Canyon Country Club, Newport Beach Country Club, the Bluffs Homeowners Association, and the City. The school district is going to utilize the water at Corona del Volume 52 - Page 675 Green Acres Project Update (89) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX Mar High School once they can afford to re -do their irrigation system. The soccer field at Eastbluff School is now utilizing reclaimed water. The City has also put on -line the medians in Jamboree Road and Bonita Creek Park. Eastbluff Park will be completed later this year, pending other park improvements. The City and the Bluffs Homeowners Association have worked hard to get the association ready for the reclaimed water. They were cited for 40 violations of cross connections by the County, which could have resulted in the residents getting reclaimed water in their pipes. As of September 100, all of the violations were corrected and the association is ready to receive the Green Acres water. In response to questions raised by Council Member Ridgeway, Public Works Director Webb explained that the City really hasn't spent $4 million. The $4 million was contributed by the OCWD to provide the transmission main into the City of Newport Beach. Newport Beach has spent close to $1 million. The City is the provider of water to the citizens of Newport and it is the City's responsibility to get it to them. The two country clubs represent the greatest expenditure from the City side since two pump stations had to be constructed to provide additional pressure to get the water into the golf course areas. This was part of an agreement that the City entered into with the country clubs at the time the City was negotiating the end -user agreements and discussing the Intertie project. The City obligated itself to provide the initial infrastructure to allow them to be able to take the water. Mr. Webb clarified that the country clubs did not pay for the pump stations since the City made the determination that from a conservation effort that the City needed to try to get it going. The country clubs spent well over $1 million each to convert their facilities. Council Member Debay further noted that there was also the political issue of IRWD putting their reclaimed water into the bay. She said the City did more than their share in order to circumvent that. Mr. Webb noted that the end -user agreement with the Bluffs Homeowners Association indicated that the City would provide, if necessary, a loan which would allow them to complete their work and would be paid back over a ten - year period. At the time the agreement was made there were two options. One option was to borrow the money from the IRWD and then lend it to the Bluffs, and the other was to lend it directly to the Bluffs at the going interest rate as determined by the City's Administrative Services Department. The City was short on funds because of the completion of the Groundwater Development Project, therefore the loan from IRWD was considered. At the next Council meeting, he indicated that staff will be asking Council to consider consummation of the loan and will be recommending that the City's water funds be utilized. The City's reserves are up, there are sufficient funds to handle this and the City has an obligation to go forward with this. Council Member Ridgeway noted that reclaimed water is more expensive than purified water and asked by what percent it is more than the water from the groundwater system. Mr. Sinacori said that it costa in the neighborhood of $600 -$700 per acre -foot to produce the reclaimed water. The district subsidizes the City, so it costs the City roughly the same to purchase the reclaimed water, as it would be to Volume 52 - Page 676 • 0 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 it from its wells. In response to Council Member Glover, Mr. Webb indicated that the Bluffs have re -done their system and are now seeking a $145,000 loan. In response to her question about whether the City has to have certain findings to make this loan, Mr. Webb indicated that the City has had a number of situations (assessment districts) where the City has worked out a loan. He said that to the best of his knowledge the City does not have to have any specific legal findings, however that will be clarified before it is brought forward on September 27th. 3. BALBOA PENINSULA PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN. Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood noted that this plan has been worked on for quite some time. She indicated that the parking management plan was the #1 priority identified for further work by the Council when the Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee (BPPAC) report and the Balboa Peninsula Planning Study were brought to them. At that time the Council also talked about doing extensive public outreach efforts as peninsula revitalization issues were worked on. She indicated that there have been numerous public workshops. Gary Hamrick, Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc., noted that there are 16 options available as part of the plan. In terms of the overall scope of work, Mr. Hamrick indicated that the major tasks included a very comprehensive inventory of parking (where is parking located, what type of parking is it, what are the fees, what are the time limits, is it public or private). Written surveys of businesses and residents were conducted to find out what people had to say and a series of three public workshops were held throughout the process which led up to discussions of the options available. Personal interviews were conducted with key stakeholders, including commercial and residential representatives, and utilization and duration surveys were conducted in order to provide a technical analysis of what the actual problems are (how long do people stay in the meters, how long do they stay in non - metered spaces, how busy is it and is it really a problem in some areas versus others). They looked at other beach city programs, and a land use and parking code model analysis was provided to determine the actual land use on the peninsula and if the parking is adequate and if not, who is using the parking. Since the peninsula is so large and varied, it was split up into four study areas for purposes of starting to quantify and identify the individual issues so that the local issues could be identified. He noted that every single parking space throughout the entire peninsula was surveyed in the field and charted on maps and graphs in order to determine where the parking supply is compared to the parking demand. He noted that they did not count private garages, but every commercial private parking space and every single public space was inventoried. Referring to a graphic, he indicated that they actually measured the number of on- street parking spaces and looked at the types of meters and the location. All of the public parking lots were inventoried (metered and ticketed lots) to look at the types of meters and the location. In terms of the inventory, there are about 10,500 . total spaces on the peninsula. Almost 3 /4ths of them are publicly owned and operated spaces and 30% are private commercial spaces in private lots. In terms of the public spaces, 40% are 6 -hour meters, 38% are located in the Volume 52 -Page 677 INDEX Balboa Peninsula Parking Management (85) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX Balboa Pier lots and the remainder are scattered and are meters with varied duration - 20 minute, 30 minute, one, two and 12 hours. Twenty -seven percent of all the public spaces are currently blue posts. He noted that the largest proportions of the spaces are on- street non - metered and mostly in the residential areas. The next largest proportion is the private commercial at just over 3,000 and then the on- street metered along the medians at Balboa Boulevard and other locations. Using graphics to illustrate, he explained the different types of parking available and noted that it is very unusual for a beach area to have that many 6 -hour long -term meters. In response to Council Member Glover, Mr. Hamrick explained that the blue meters are meters that the City has designated so that residents, business people and even non - residents can purchase permits in order to park at those meters without actually feeding the meter. Mr. Hamrick stated that they also inventoried the meter fees throughout the entire peninsula and referred to a graphic to illustrate the distribution of the current meter fees in terms of cost per hour. He noted that in the McFadden -Lido area essentially the meters are $0.25 (blue) with some beginnings of the higher costs ($0.50 and $1.00 as you start to go south). Around Newport Pier the parking is all $1.00 and $1.00 per hour throughout the whole of the Balboa Boulevard median and then once you get to Central Balboa there is a mixture of fees ($0.25, $0.50 and some $1.00). He explained that the City actually took aerial photographs of the peninsula on a time series throughout the day on a typical summer weekend day and a weekday to find out how the parking is used in the early morning, mid- afternoon, and late afternoon, in order to look at the patterns. The graphic shows the weekday for the first part of the study area (West Newport residential, Lido, City Plaza area, Cannery Village, McFadden Square) and the dark lines represent those streets where there was 85% or greater utilization of parking. Typically when parking is designed, capacity is looked at as about 85 -90% of the total supply. Anything over 85% or 90% is considered to be effectively fully utilized and the point at which you would look for some type of improvement. He noted that in this particular example, there is about 50% - 65% overall utilization, indicating that there isn't a tremendous problem during the day in this area during the summertime period. He said they weren't able to determine who was parking in each space, but looked at the trends of how many leave and how many arrive. He indicated that in a residential area you tend to see very high utilization in the late evening or early morning. Looking at a similar graphic for Sunday at 11:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., the survey showed at or over the 85% threshold at 2:00 p.m. and at 5:00 p.m. Every single street is fully occupied, which is because of the people who live there as well as the beach goers and commercial related employee parking. He referred to another graphic which showed the peak parking occupancy overall for the Tuesday and the Sunday that were surveyed, showing that even on Tuesday the public lots are 80% occupied. The on- street parking is lower at 55 %, which indicates that the residents are going to work and there isn't as large of a beach crowd on weekdays. The private lots are 54% used, which is very typical even in the most highly utilized parking areas. Overall he said there is still about 40% available on Tuesday, however on Sunday the public lots are well over 90% full, so essentially there is very little or no parking remaining and even the on- street parking is nearly 90% full at the peak time on Sunday, which indicates problems for the residents who live on those . streets (residential non - metered streets). He noted that the private lots are not very heavily utilized overall. Volume 52 - Page 678 Ll 0 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 The other element of the technical analysis involved parking duration or turnover (how long do people stay in the spaces once they go there). In the Newport Pier area they found that in the 1 -hour meters, 65% or more stay more than one hour by either putting more money into the meter at the end of the hour or they get a ticket. It was lower in the Balboa Pier area, however still almost one -third stay longer than one hour. For the 6 -hour meters, 77% in the Newport Pier area are staying less than four hours, so they are not fully utilizing those 6 -hour spaces. In the Balboa Pier area, 85% are staying less than four hours. What this indicates is that there are very short -term meters where people want to stay longer and very long -term meters that aren't being used for six hours. Previous studies have shown that people normally come to the beach and stay from 2 — 4 hours. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Thomson s questions, Mr. Hamrick reported that the City has actually done some investigation into the time limits and his firm looked at this in detail with respect to the validation issue and other issues for the Balboa Pier lot and found a large number coming into the pier lot stayed 1— 2 hours. He noted that the 1 -hour meters tend to be right next to the commercial businesses, which is appropriate, and in other communities 2 -hour meters in the beach area are the most common. He said it is very rare to have 6 -hour meters unless it is like the Balboa Pier lot and it is a ticket situation. Referring to another graphic, he indicated that it refers to the final major part of the analysis, which shows what the land uses are that actually utilize the parking, or who demands the parking (beachgoers, restaurant, or retail). Unfortunately, he said they couldn't quantify visitors and beachgoers coming in because there is no way to do that except by counting them on the beach. He said they can quantify the demand for all of the land uses on the peninsula. The graphic shows which of the actual buildings (the commercial land on the peninsula), require the most parking. It shows that restaurants require about one -third of the total parking supply (the largest component), followed by commercial retail (all the stores & shops), followed by office. In the two categories (restaurant and shops), it is well over 50 %. Commercial vessels (Catalina charters, fishing charters) are at 7 %. He noted that the City code requires parking for restaurants, offices and all of these land uses, however there is no code requirement for parking for beachgoers, which creates a major problem with an area like the peninsula. He said there is almost an infinite demand for beach parking. To summarize the overall key findings, he said that essentially all public parking is utilized on summer weekends, on- street parking is quite well used year round (based on conversations and older studies), private parking tends to be under- utilized, meter time limits often exceed or dont correlate to the amount of time that people want to stay in the location they are visiting, meter fees are generally low compared to other beach cities ($1.00- 1.50thour), parking intrusion in residential areas was identified as the major residential concern, and restaurants generate about 1/3 of the commercial demand followed by retail, office and commercial vessels. In response to questions raised by Council Member Adams, Mr. Hamrick noted that residential on- street parking was not taken into consideration since in theory residents should have their own parking on -site in a driveway or garage. He indicated that they can generate that information by looking at the number of housing units to figure out the theoretical demand. As part of previous studies a number of goals were brought forth and presented to the public in the workshops. The public was Volume 52 - Page 679 INDEX City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX asked to prioritize the goals. As a result, protecting residential parking came out very high, somewhat mixed was encouraging business patronage, parking aesthetics was somewhat mixed, improve linkages to public transportation was mixed, reduce summer roadway congestion was a high priority, improving intersection visibility was a relatively high priority, enhancing pedestrian accessibility was quite mixed, enhancing bicycle travel was overall a lower priority, and generating reasonable revenues was a somewhat lower priority. At the workshop, a couple of priorities were added by those in attendance: 1) acquire more property to provide additional parking, which received a mixed high -low priority; and 2) don't change anything. He explained that all of this technical background information led up to the development of a series of options for parking management. They are presented as options rather than as a prioritized set of recommendations, so that the community and the Council can jointly discuss and decide which ones are appropriate. He said that staff has reviewed all of the options that his firm presented and put them into three categories: 1) approve options for priority implementation; 2) approve options for later implementation following staff preparation; 3) approve options for further staff review and development; and 4) one item not to be pursued. In terms of the West Newport residential, Lido, City plaza, Cannery Village, and McFadden Square area some of the major options put forth for consideration include phasing out the $0.25 per hour meter fees and phasing it in up to $1.00 per hour. He noted that many of the options can only be implemented following review and approval by the Coastal Commission through a coastal permit. He explained the processes that can be used to obtain Coastal Commission approval and noted that as far as fees the Commission does not have any written guidelines about the raising of fees, however they have some unwritten rules that they follow. He noted that one of the ideas for this particular area is to unify and bring the parking fees closer to the market price that other beach cities charge in order to serve the population appropriately. One of the other elements recommended for this area is remote parking with a shuttle system, which is an important aspect especially if residential permit parking is considered. Another recommendation is to modify around the Newport Pier area some of the meter time limits to make them reflect how the meters are being used, which would take Coastal Commission approval. Also, changing some of the 1 -hour meters to 2 -hour meters is an option. In the Central Balboa commercial area, some of the recommendations include changing 1 -hour meters to 2 -hours to provide better utilization by customers, changing all the meter fees to $1.00, consideration of a valet parking operation to serve the businesses as a group, implementing a bus layover area for private buses, implementation of a validation system for the large Balboa lot to encourage business use of the lots, and to look at a reserved parking system for the charter and sport - fishing vessel operations. Mr. Hamrick summarized the options (not in the order as recommended by staff). Option 1 — Increase meter fees in Central Balboa to $1.00/hour, and in Lido /Cannery Village to $0.50/hour to be phased in over time so there is never more than a $0.25/hour increase in any one given year. Volume 52 - Page 680 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX Option 2 — Modify meter time limits to most effectively utilize spaces. Option 3 — Extending meter time limit in commercial areas of the peninsula to 8 p.m. Option 4 — Implement a `Business Parking Permit" program to allow owners and employees of businesses on the peninsula to park for extended periods at selected meters. Option 5 — Create Visitor Parking Information Guide/Map. Option 6 —Implement trial period shared valet parking program during peak season. Option 7 — Implement a shared use parking program. Option 8 — Pursue implementation of resident permit parking on affected streets on an as- needed basis. Option 9 — Implement bus layover area for private buses. Option 10 — Work with operators to develop charter /sport fishing vessel parking permit system to allow charter boat and sport fishing passengers to park all day in designated areas. Option 1 — Chalk mark tires for purposes of ticketing overtime vehicles at meters. Option 12 — Conduct regular (quarterly or bi- annual) monitoring of lot utilization and land uses. Option 13 — Add parking off - peninsula with peak season shuttle system. Option 14 — Install an interactive, real time signage program to provide parking information. Option 15 — Post signs restricting vehicles over six feet in height and/or add standard 10 to 15 foot red curb sections at selected intersections along Bay Avenue and Balboa Boulevard. Option 16 — Balboa Pier lot validation program Council Member Ridgeway concurred with Council Member Adams and said that the hypothetical demand for the residential on- street parking is needed since in Central Balboa there is clearly a conflict of goals between residents and commercial businesses. He said that what is missing in the report and professional analysis is the conflict in Central Balboa from about 18th Street down to Medina. . Council Member Adams said that he feels that the real parking demand by land use should be reviewed not necessarily using the code demand, but taking into consideration the time of day, as well as the residential demand Volume 52 -.Page 681 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX during those times of day. AD Council Member Glover stated that she feels somehow the City needs to get a better analysis of the number of beachgoers coming to the peninsula. She noted that through her experience in Laguna Beach as a business owner, increasing fees is better for businesses because of the parking turnover. In response to Council Member Adams, Assistant City Manager Wood indicated that as part of the further analysis for implementation, staff will provide net cost and revenue estimates for each of the options. Council Member Ridgeway, as District 1 representative on the Council, indicated that he thinks many of the options are excellent, globally they will help the peninsula and he is very supportive of many of the recommendations. Mayor Pro Tem Thomson explained that the Council will discuss this more at a future evening meeting and more of the refined options with cost estimates will be laid out for consideration. He encouraged staff to provide the cost estimate (raw data) as soon as possible to assist them in evaluating the options. He voiced concern about the number of visitors to the peninsula versus the number of parking spaces and said that maybe code enforcement can look at the number of garages in that area that are used for purposes other than parking. Council Member Debay reported that she recently toured a facility for sale on Superior that has a parking structure on an adjacent lot with a large surface parking area around the office building. She said she has been encouraging the broker to let the City know when a buyer does appear on the scene to see if maybe the City might be able to participate in that property in some way or another regarding the parking structure. Council Member Ridgeway noted that if the parking on the peninsula were doubled in the summertime it would be used. He said he thinks the City needs to manage what it has and pointed out that Mr. Hamrick has advised that off -site or remote parking areas don t work. Tom Hyans, President of Central Newport Beach Community Association, distributed copies of comments on the 16 options, and noted that they participated in all three workshops and would like to continue to participate in the future. He said that when the implementation plans are put together it should be done at a PROP meeting or in study session rather than being done before a full Council so there can be some discussion. He said that the residential area between the two piers along Balboa Boulevard is primarily non -owner occupied duplexes. As far as meter feeding, he said it is his experience that the shorter duration meters tend to be $025/hour and the longer duration meters (i.e. 6- hours) tend to be $1.00/hour and at least around McFadden the cheap meters are the ones being fed. Bob Rubien, Crab Cooker, said that he hopes the City opposes any measure that makes the community less accessible to those who are not fortunate enough to be able to live in Newport Beach. Regarding the residential permit program, he said he couldn't imagine how it could be administered in Volume 52 - Page 682 0 9 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 any way that would not accomplish anything but bitterness. He said he favors leaving things alone until the City can provide more parking. He said the extension of the meters until 8:00 p.m. has been reviewed previously, would not provide any benefit and would force people to go to the residential areas to park since there are no meters. Other measures should be exhausted before going to this extreme. He spoke in support of changing the meter rates to $1.00/hour but not waiting a few years to do it. In reference to the anti- feeding of the meters he pointed out this proposal would basically eliminate the tradition of the family outing at the beach. Bob Black, Balboa Merchants & Owners Association, stated that the Board has not addressed these items yet, but will be doing so shortly. He said he thinks many of the ideas look very good and questioned whether there was anything in the report about the metered areas on A & B Streets. Council Member Ridgeway explained that those streets are addressed in the Balboa Pier parking lot redesign report and Ron Baers is doing some design work to address the issues. Stuart McKenzie, 1205 West Bay, noted in reference to comments made about the utilization of garages, that many years ago (in the 60's) the City checked every garage on the peninsula, however it didn't accomplish anything. The garages were cleaned out for the inspection and the next day the owners utilized them for different purposes. He stated that there are many curbs on the peninsula that are painted red that don't need to be painted. He questioned why the 10th Street beach is painted all red when there could be parking spaces there. Many years ago the Police Department let the residents park red along side each curb and there is nothing in the code that allows this. He also noted that on the weekends cars are parked in front of the school in the loading zone and by code it isn t allowed, however it should be allowed. Chuck Remley, 101 E. Balboa Blvd., said that the house he lives in is 100 years old and there is no garage and adjacent houses also have no garages. As part of the argument for a residential parking permit, he stated that he owns a business and every year buys a permit so he can park at the blue meters. He said there are a lot of people in Central Balboa that don't have parking spaces for their cars. He said there is a rental property around the corner from him with 4 -5 bedrooms with a two -car garage and when it is rented for the week there are more than two cars that arrive and it impacts the parking. Council Member Ridgeway pointed out that the City has summer rentals of one - bedroom units and when they are rented 5 -7 cars show up during those periods. Following discussion about the timing of this issue, it was determined that this item would be brought back to Council at a regular meeting for discussion, debate and action after it has gone back to PROP. 4. BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT REDESIGN. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to continue this item to September 27, 1999. Volume 52 - Page 683 INDEX C- 3209(A) Balboa Pier Parking Lot Redesign (38) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 13, 1999 In response to questions about timing, Public Works Director Webb indicated that this item will require Coastal Commission approval which takes about three months, therefore it would really be pushing it to get something in place by next summer. Without objection, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Mayor O'Neil PUBLIC COMMENTS — None ADJOURNMENT — 6:00 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on September 8, 1999, at 3:40 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 52 - Page 684 INDEX 0 0 * CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes DRAFT Regular Meeting September 13, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7.00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Absent: None Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member Adams. Invocation by Greg Kelley, President of the Newport Mesa Irvine Inter - Faith Council. Presentation of $125,000 check from the Friends of the Library. Presentation to Lifeguard Buddy G. Belshe for his 50 years of continued presence and guidance in the field of Marine Safety in Orange County and Newport Beach. Presentation by the American Red Cross to the Newport Beach Lifeguards, the City of Newport Beach and Marine Safety Lieutenant Jim Turner for the blood donated to the American Red Cross this year and in past years. Presentation of a proclamation honoring the Okazaki - Newport Beach relationship to the delegation from the Okazaki South Rotary Club. MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NO DISCUSSION ITEM): • Council Member Debay reported that the October 11 Council meeting has been cancelled due to the League of California Cities conference that will be held in San Jose. Mayor O'Neil announced that Council Member Debay will be sworn in at the conference as the new Orange County Division President of the League of California Cities. • Council Member Adams requested that a revision be made to Council Policy A -2 (Boards and Commission Appointments), particularly regarding the provision in which individuals can only serve on one standing City commission or committee. He believed that exceptions need to be made for those individuals that serve on a . second committee because they are a member of another committee, i.e. a Planning Commissioner may be seated on the Economic Development Committee as the representative from the Planning Commission. Volume 52 - Page 685 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Council Member Adams announced his intent to continue Agenda Item 21 (30 mile per hour speed limit on Santiago Drive) to a future meeting so that there could be continued discussions with the affected residents. He stated that a community meeting may occur and requested that staff create an action plan for addressing the speed problems on Santiago Drive. Council Member Ridgeway indicated that the City Manager received correspondence that requested Council to look at the dredging equipment out in the Bay. He stated that the Harbor Committee addressed this and requested that a meeting be conducted with the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, a County representative, and the Fish and Game Department. He believed that the City needs an industrial area and that the Shellmaker Island would be an appropriate area for dredging equipment, dock construction equipment, and trash removal from the Bay. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 23, 1999. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. 2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by title only. ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION 3. ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 13.20 TO THE NBMC PERTAINING TO OBSTRUCTIONS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. Adopt Ordinance No. 99 -23. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 4. 1999 -2000 SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER REPLACEMENT — AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3286). Approve the plans and specifications; award the contract to Ranco Corporation for the total bid amount of $81,552.25, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; and establish an amount of $8,000 to cover the cost of unforeseen work. 5. Item removed at the request of Council Member Ridgeway. 6. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE BAYSIDE DRIVE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 319 CARNATION AVENUE, CORONA DEL MAR (EP99 -353). Approve the application subject to: 1) Execution of an Encroachment Agreement for non- standard improvements: authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement; and authorize and direct the City Clerk to have the agreement recorded with the Orange County Recorder; 2) An Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department; 3) a Building Permit issued by the Building Department; and 4) the Building Department, General Volume 52 - Page 686 INDEX E Ord 99 -23; Obstructions On Public Property (70) C -3286 1999 -2000 Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter Replacement (38) EP 99 -353 Carnation Avenue Encroachment Agreement (65) 0 0 11 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Services Department and Public Works Department shall approve all improvements. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE OCEAN BOULEVARD PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO 3601 AND 3611 OCEAN BOULEVARD, CORONA DEL MAR (EP99 -348). Approve the application subject to: 1) Execution of Encroachment Agreements for non - standard improvements: authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreements; and authorize and direct the City Clerk to have the agreements recorded with the Orange County Recorder; 2) Encroachment Permits issued by the Public Works Department; 3) Building Permits issued by the Building Department; and 4) the Building Department, Fire Department, General Services Department, and Public Works Department shall approve the plans and construction of improvements. 8. AMENDMENT TO THE JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT (JWA) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT APPROVING AN INCREASE IN LEASEABLE SPACE. Approve the request to increase leaseable space at JWA; and direct the Mayor to execute the Fourth Supplemental Stipulation modifying the JWA Settlement Agreement. 9. CONTRACT FOR NEWPORT CENTER PLANNING PROJECT MANAGEMENT (C- 3304). Approve a professional services agreement with Hogle - Ireland, Inc. for professional project management and planning services. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 10. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR SEPTEMBER 9, 1999. Receive and file. 11. CONCLUSION OF THE 1999 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM. Remove the second public hearing for weed abatement assessment from the October 25, 1999, Council meeting agenda; and remove the adoption of a resolution confirming weed abatement costs from the October 25, 1999, Council meeting agenda. 12. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -007) TO ACCEPT DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $125,000 FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY TO THE NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY. Approve budget amendment and correct Account 8100 to be Account 8105. 13. NOMINATION FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (EDC) TO FILL EDC VACANCIES. Appoint Mark Murrel as Mariners Mile representative, Ron Baers as member at large, and reassign Steve Sutherland as member at large to fill vacancies on the Economic Development Committee. Volume 52 - Page 687 INDEX EP 99 -348 Ocean Boulevard (65) C -2535 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement (38/54) C -3304 Newport Center Planning (38) Planning (68) 1999 Weed Abatement Program (41) BA -007 Library Donation (40/50) Economic Development Committee Appointments (24) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX 14. APPOINTMENTS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AFFAIRS Environmental CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (EQAC). Confirm Council Member Quality Affairs Adams' appointment of Jennifer Winn as a District 4 member and Council Citizens Advisory Member Ridgeway's appointments of Louis Von Dyl and Elaine Linhoff as Committee (EQAC) District 1 members to the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Appointments Committee. (24) 15. Item removed at the request of Council Member Adams. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Thomson to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (5 and 15). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 5. ACCEPTANCE OF TRACT NO'S. 15011, 15222 & 15243 AND LOT F IN Ord 99 -24 TRACT NO. 15222 (HARBOR COVE TRACT). Res 99 -61 Tracts 15011, Referencing the terms on page 5, Council Member Ridgeway asked why The 15222 & 15243/ Irvine Company has the unilateral right to terminate the covenants if they Harbor Cove Tract are dedicating land for open space. City Attorney Burnham stated that the (Tract Maps) format for the covenants for the CIOSA properties was justified as an exhibit to the development agreement and that these covenants are consistent with that format. Additionally, the dedications that were required by the development agreement were to be pursuant to a form that was an exhibit to the agreement. Regarding this provision, Mr. Burnham clarified that The Irvine Company has the right to unilaterally withdraw any objections they have to any City use of the land that was at variance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. Motion by Council Member Rideewav to accept the Offer of Dedication of the open space parcel, Lot F, Tract No. 15222 in the Harbor Cove Development and authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute the Offer of Dedication, and direct the City Clerk to have the Offer of Dedication recorded with the Orange County Recorder; adopt Resolution No. 99.61 accepting the dedication of Lot F of Tract No. 15222, and direct the City Clerk to have the Resolution recorded with the Orange County Recorder after the Offer of Dedication has been recorded; approve the improvement plans and specifications and accept the public improvements constructed in conjunction with Tract Nos. 15011, 15222 & 15243; authorize the City Clerk to release the faithful performance bonds for Tract No's. 15011, 15222 & 15243; authorize the City Clerk to release the labor and material bonds for Tract No's 15011, 15222 & 15243 in six months provided no claims have been filed; approve an Encroachment Agreement with the Harbor Cove Community Association for the construction of non - standard street improvements, authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement, and authorize and direct the City Clerk to have the Agreement Volume 52 - Page 688 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 15,1999 recorded with the Orange County Recorder; and introduce Ordinance No. 99 -24 providing for enforcement of the California Vehicle Code on the roads within the Harbor Cove Development. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 15. PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL POLICY I -27 (PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION COMMISSION AUTHORITY, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS AND APPEAL PROCEDURES). In response to Council Member Adams' questions, City Attorney Burnham stated that a separate resolution will be created within 30 days to establish the appeal fee. In response to Council Member Glover's questions, Mr. Burnham indicated that Council has the right of review and that there is currently no time limit. Council Member Glover noted that there is a time limit to appeal Planning Commission actions and that this policy is written very similar to the Planning Commission's provisions. Mr. Burnham concurred that including a time limit would be a good addition to the policy. Council Member Glover believed that Council would want to keep this in concert with Planning Commission provisions. In response to Mayor O'Neil's questions, Mr. Burnham clarified that changes can be made without bringing the policy back for Council review. Mayor O'Neil indicated that it would be appropriate to have the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission appeal procedures be consistent with that of the Planning Commission appeal procedures. Motion by Council Member Glover to approve Council Policy I -27, but amend the policy's time limits to be consistent with Planning Commission's time limits for appeals and Council reviews, and establish the appeal fee to be less than the cost for a Planning Commission appeal. Following discussion, the motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes. None Abstain: None Absent: None • Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, noted that there is an initiative petition being circulated in the City. He indicated that, had the initiative been in effect the last 10 years, 12 of the 55 General Plan Amendments (GPA) would have needed to go through the election process. He reported that the 12 GPAe are: GPA 88 -2(B) (Toyota Motor Sales); GPA 89 -2(A) (Santa Ana Heights); GPA 90- Volume 52 - Page 689 INDEX Policy I -27 Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission (24/69) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX 3(A) (Sheraton Hotel); GPA 92 -1(C) (Old Newport Boulevard Plan); GPA 93 -2(A) (Conversion of Aeronutronics); GPA 93 -3(B) (PacTel Camelback); GPA 94 -1(B) (Edwards Big Newport Cinemas); GPA 94 -1(F) (Pacific View Memorial Park); GPA 94 -2(B) (Fashion Island Expansion); GPA 95 -1(B) (Fletcher Jones); GPA 95- 2(C) (Corona del Mar Plaza); and GPA 97 -2 (Bonita Canyon). • Tom Thomas, 1224 Berkshire Lane, stated that yesterday was the Cannery Restaurant's last day. He expressed the opinion that its closure is a tragedy for the City and especially to him since his father owned and operated the Cannery from 1935 to 1968. He believed that the Cannery was the last element that proved that Newport Beach was once a fishing town, and that it is sad to lose it for a few homes. He indicated that the Cannery provided thousands of jobs and was the main economy for the City until the mid- 1940's. Mr. Thomas believed that the City probably will not have the chance to rebuild it again if it is demolished and that there are some decisions that need to be reversed. He noted that the Cannery has brought tourism to the City, has special pride for the City, and should not be removed so easily. He requested that Council develop a task force to look at the property and put a hold on its demolition. • Jack Sedler, 260 Cagney Avenue, stated that the Cannery has always been an asset in the community since it brings in tourism and revenue. He believed that, if the City is going to close the Cannery, all the restaurants in the City should be closed. He indicated that he represents a conglomerate of Newport Beach people who will buy any good restaurant in the City to keep them open. He expressed the opinion that this should go to a vote of the people and encouraged everyone who agrees with him to write their Council Member. PUBLIC HEARINGS 16. STATUS REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6 (THE C -2920 IRVINE COMPANY, CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN Development SPACE AGREEMENT [ CIOSA]) (contd. from 7/12/99 & 819/99). Agreement No. 6 CIOSA Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. (38) There being no testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Glover to determine compliance of Development Agreement No. 6. Council Member Glover stated that she is pleased to see that staff followed through with her suggestions and that proper fences will be erected. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 17. APPEAL BY THE NEWPORT BEACH BREWING COMPANY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO USE Use Permit 3485 Newport Beach PERMIT NO. 5485 TO ALLOW A CHANGE IN ALCOHOLIC Brewing Company Volume 52 - Page 690 0 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 BEVERAGE CONTROL (ABC) LICENSE TYPE TO ALLOW FULL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SERVICE. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. Keith Bohr, appellant, 415 Townsquare Lane, No. 219, Huntington Beach, stated that he is an investor in the Newport Beach Brewing Company and a consultant on the appeal. He requested that their use permit be amended to allow full alcohol service so that the Brewing Company can remain competitive with the other restaurants in the area. Referencing Exhibit A (Findings and Conditions for Denial), he reported that they represented only .07 percent of the crimes in Reporting District 15 (Finding 1); that they are not trying to add a license, but are just wanting to modify their existing license (Finding 2); that they have the support of the residents within 100 feet of the restaurant, generate tax revenue, provide 45 jobs, and is the only brewery in the City (Finding 3); and that they disagree with Finding 4 because of their track record over the past 4.5 years and because they would not contribute to any of the detriments mentioned. Mr. Bohr respectfully requested that Council approve the Conditions for Approval (Exhibit B). He emphasized that the Brewing Company is a permitted use and that approving this will not be detrimental to the City. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions, Senior Planner Alford confirmed that the use permit is specifically for a restaurantlbrewpub; that, if the Brewing Company fails, the new operator is obligated to run a restaurantlbrewpub under the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit; and that the Newport Beach Brewing Company is the only brewpub in the City. Shawn Needelman, 46 Agostino, Irvine, Newport Beach Brewing Company Operations Manager, stated that he has been with the Brewing Company since it opened in April 1985. He emphasized that they are not a bar that serves food, but a restaurant that also brews its own beer; they do not have the lines that they used to; they do not have late night parties; they do not have a DJ, band, or any other form of live entertainment; and they do not have a small menu. However, he believed they have evolved into an established restaurant that caters to 20 year olds to seniors, couples and families. Mr. Needelman indicated that the Brewing Company is looking for something to improve itself and believed that acquiring the license does that. He reported that the menu is continually upgraded, that food sales have continued to make up a larger percentage of the gross sales, and that it makes up nearly 64 percent for this year's sales. He stated that the sales have leveled, are lower than they were last year, and they lose customers because they cannot provide what one or all the guests would like. Mr. Needelman believed that having the license will also benefit their regular customers because it will provide them with a choice. He clarified that they want to complement their enhanced food, wine, and special menu, and capture a more diverse clientele by acquiring this license. Council Member Glover indicated that she saw a statement that generally states that the Brewing Company will close if this does not occur. Mr. Needelman stated that they will not close tomorrow if they do not get the license; however, he reiterated that their sales are down and that they Volume 52 - Page 691 (88) INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX believe it could be attributed to them not being able to sell hard alcohol or spirits. Council Member Glover emphasized that only 4 Planning Commissioners were present at the meeting. Mr. Needelman believed that the Planning Commission probably denied their request because of the high concentration in Reporting District 15 and because they were not sure that adding this license would be beneficial to the Brewing Company or help the community in any way. He expressed the opinion that the license would allow the Brewing Company to improve the menu and reiterated that alcohol is needed to be competitive with other restaurants. Council Member Debay expressed concern with the concentration of bars in that area and that young people tend to jump from bar to bar during the summertime. This causes them to walk in the streets late at night and disturb residents. She stated that she is concerned that the Brewing Company will be more of a target for the bar hoppers if they are a full service bar. Mr. Needelman reported that they card everyone that walks in the door, they have never had problems with under -aged drinking or arrests, the amount of drunk driving incidents involving the Brewing Company is very minimal, the employees attend alcohol class, and managers are on the floor at all times. He believed it would be a benefit if patrons stayed at their restaurant rather than jump from bar to bar. Charles Huffine 3085 Yukon Avenue, Costa Mesa, expressed support of the Brewing Company's request and stated that he and his wife have been frequenting the Brewing Company for the last year. He indicated that they initially were not sure if the Brewing Company was a place they wanted to go to; however, the clientele has drastically changed to become a very comfortable place for a weekly visit. He believed that the patrons now range in age from the high -20's to the 60's and that they bring in a larger number of families. Mr. Huffine encouraged Council to consider the Brewing Company's request to have a full service liquor license because it will give them an opportunity to continue to be a successful business. He noted that the Brewing Company draws a lot of people from out of state and from the local community, and hoped that they could become a landmark restaurant. David Haithcock, 500 Newport Center Drive, stated that he works for a national bank trade association and that he entertains clients as part of his job. He expressed that he likes the Brewing Company because it has turned into a landmark for the City. He reported that he takes his clients to the Brewing Company for lunch or dinner, but that it is unfortunate that they have to leave after their meal because they want an after- dinner cocktail. He expressed his support of the Brewing Company's request so that they can continue to prosper. Pus Huffine, 3085 Yukon Avenue, Costa Mesa, stated that she and her husband have been regular patrons of the Brewing Company for about a year. She indicated that she not only has gotten to know the employees, but has gotten to know people who also regard the Brewing Company as a home away from home. She stated that they not only find the establishment a great place to unwind, but a fine restaurant. Ms. Huffine reported that they never hesitate to bring friends, family, or business associates to the Brewing Volume 62 - Page 692 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Company, or to recommend the restaurant as a premiere place. She believed that, if you are looking for something good about the City, the Newport Beach Brewing Company would be it. She stated that she has made it a personal goal to let everyone know that Newport Beach has many treasures; however, she would hate to see a place of value become a statistic because they could not stay competitive in a very competitive market. Ms. Huffine requested that Council reconsider this very reasonable request and allow the Brewing Company to continue to be hospitable hosts to their guests. Amy Anderson, 328 Fullerton Avenue, stated that she is an employee of the Brewing Company and read a fax that was sent to them by Robert J. Rosner of the Xerox Corporation. Mr. Rosner expressed his support of the Brewing Company's request to serve alcoholic beverages other than beer and wine. He indicated that he often takes customers to the Brewing Company and that the outing would be more enjoyable if he was able to offer them a cocktail before the meal. He added that the Brewing Company is a quality addition to the commercial establishments in the City. Michael Madlock, 113 318t Street, Vice President of the Newport Beach Brewing Company, hoped that the decision- makers have been to the Brewing Company since they have built a first class operation. He stated that the Brewing Company has been managed properly and would appreciate Council's support of the appeal. Orazio "Raz" Salmon, 2600 Newport Boulevard, No. 212, President of the Newport Beach Brewing Company, reported that he was one of the first breweries in the area and now there are 16 breweries. He noted that they no longer have lines and that he would rather build on the restaurant. There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. In response to Council Member Adams' questions, Mr. Borg clarified that the Brewing Company is not open until 2 a.m. because of an ABC condition which closes them at 1 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Assistant City Manager Wood noted that Condition 10 indicates that the Brewing Company may not serve alcoholic beverages without serving the regular menu. Mr. Alford clarified that the Brewing Company always had a 2 a.m. closing time but ABC placed the 1 a.m. limit after the City approved them. Council Member Adams suggested that the condition be consistent with ABC's. Mayor O'Neil noted that page 1 of the staff report states that "...the ABC is required to deny the application for the license unless the City determines that public convenience or necessity would be served by its issuance." He expressed the opinion that the City is bound to follow ABC's denial unless they can find that the public's convenience and necessity requires its issuance. Ms. Wood reported that this is the State law that deals with areas where there is over - concentrations of liquor licenses and that Council Policy K -7 delegates that authority to the Chief of Police for most cases. She confirmed that the Police Chief could deny the license if he finds that there is no public convenience or necessity after Council approves it, but doubts he would do that. Additionally, since the City has a local alcoholic beverage outlet ordinance, one of the considerations for granting a use permit for a new or expanded alcoholic beverage outlet is to look at whether the public Volume 52 - Page 693 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX convenience or necessity is served. Motion by Council Member Glover to reverse the Planning Commission's denial of amended Use Permit No. 3485. Council Member Glover believed that this is a reasonable request. She noted that she can go almost anywhere to find similar establishments and believed that Council has a responsibility to be competitive with other cities. She expressed the opinion that the Planning Commission might have felt the same way if all the Commissioners attended the meeting. Council Member Adams requested that Council Member Glover amend the motion to modify Condition 7 so that the hours of operation for Fridays and Saturdays is from 6 a.m. and 1 a.m. Council Member Glover agreed. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the staff report contained a lot of testimony from the Police Department, but believed that they were not comfortable advocating a change because the Brewing Company is in Reporting District 15. However, it appeared that the Police Department did not have a problem with an operator whose staff is well- trained and runs a good operation. He stated that he is satisfied that they are very responsible, have trained their people, and run a good operation. He noted that there has only been one Police instance that involved the Brewing Company and added that he has patronized the Brewing Company. He reported that the Brewing Company had a toxic problem in which they immediately called the authorities. This also proves that they are responsive citizens because they stopped the problem and took responsive action themselves. He expressed support of the appeal, noting that there are two restaurants that are closing and two licenses that are being lost. He stated that he finds the Brewing Company to be a well-run operation and that he wants to give them an opportunity to continue. Regarding the land use decision, Council Member Ridgeway emphasized that the conditional use permit is for a restaurant/brewpub and that anyone who operates on that land will have to continue to use the conditional use permit and continue to operate a brewpub. He believed this helps prevent a problem if the Brewing Company fails. Council Member Debay expressed concern because the City has been sending a message to Cannery Village that it does not want to intensify the alcoholic use and make a situation worse. Regarding Council Member Debay's questions regarding Standard City Requirement K, Ms. Wood confirmed that the Planning Commission can call this for review to modify or add conditions, or even conduct hearings for the possible revocation of this license if this adds to the intensity of the problems. Mr. Burnham suggested that the word "variance" be changed to "use permit" in this condition. He clarified that ABC handles their own permits, and added that, when Council grants a use permit, privileges/conditions run with the land and applies to subsequent property owners. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Thomson's question, Mr. Burnham stated that the standard to determine if they are complying is whether they are detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Therefore, any factor like intoxication, excessive noise, and fights/disturbances would Volume 62 - Page 694 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 • warrant a call for a modification or possible revocation c The amended motion to reverse the Planning Commission's denial of amended Use Permit No. 3485; amend Condition 7 so that the hours of operation for Fridays and Saturdays is between 6 a.m. and 1 a.m.; and change "variance" to "use permit" in Standard City Requirement K carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Mayor O'Neil Noes: Noyes Abstain: None Absent: None 18. VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF AN ALLEY BOUNDED BY GRAND CANAL, BALBOA AVENUE, ABALONE AVENUE AND PARK AVENUE (LITTLE BALBOA ISLAND). Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. There being no public testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing Motion by Council Member Noyes to adopt Resolution No. 99 -62 ordering the vacation and abandonment of a 2.5 -foot wide strip of right -of -way on both sides of a 25 -foot wide alley on Little Balboa Island. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 19. AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN TO RECLASSIFY THE SEGMENT OF SANTIAGO DRIVE BETWEEN IRVINE AVENUE AND TUSTIN AVENUE AS A COMMUTER ROADWAY ON THE MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS [GPA 98- 3(D)]. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. Bryan Bond, 2431 Santiago Drive, stated that he has been involved with this issue for about four years. Mr. Bond requested and received clarification from Mayor O'Neil that Council intends to continue Agenda Item 21. Chris Schwartz, 2401 Santiago Drive, on behalf of the Santiago Drive residents, expressed his overwhelming support to downgrade Santiago Drive from an arterial highway to a collector street. He indicated that the effort behind this was prompted by residents who strive to institute some traffic calming measures on Santiago Drive, and that they did not have the ability to do this with the arterial highway classification. Council Member Debay noted that this came to her attention when she was Mayor in 1996. She commended Public Works Director Webb and his staff Volume 52 - Page 695 INDEX Res 99 -62 Little Balboa Island Vacation & Abandonment (90) Res 99 -63 GPA 98 -3(D) Santiago Drive Reclassification (45) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 for their tenacity, explaining that they had to go to the City of Costa Mesa and then to OCTA to begin this endeavor. There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Glover to adopt Resolution No. 99 -63, adopting General Plan Amendment 98 -3(D). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CONTINUED BUSINESS 20. PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PUBLIC INPUT ON NEWPORT CENTER PLANNING (contd. from 8/09/99 & 8/23/99). Motion by Council Member Debay to receive public input at Planning Commission Study Sessions and other public meetings. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 21. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12.24 (SPECIAL SPEED ZONES) OF THE NBMC TO ESTABLISH A SPEED LIMIT OF 30 MILES PER HOUR ON SANTIAGO DRIVE BETWEEN IRVINE AVENUE AND TUSTIN AVENUE. Motion by Council Member Adams to continue this item to the September 27, 1999 Council meeting. Council Member Adams stated that he has had discussions with Santiago Drive residents and believed that some of the citizens would like to see an action plan that goes with the proposal so that they have some assurance that the City will provide an effective traffic calming measure. He indicated that more dialogue and staff work needs to be done prior to discussing this. Council Member Glover stated that she would like the City Manager to set up a community meeting and provide notices to the public. She requested that Police Chief McDonell and Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston also attend. Volume 52 - Page 696 INDEX Newport Center Planning (68) Special Speed Zones Santiago Drive (86) • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Bryan Bond, 2431 Santiago Drive, asked who will be noticed about this meeting. City Manager Bludau stated that the City might not want to invite everyone from every street so that the numbers are more manageable, noting that there are some key people that Council and the Police Chief have been talking with. Mr. Bond indicated that a meeting was already conducted that involved all the streets when Council Member Debay was Mayor. He expressed concern that these issues are being continually discussed and hoped that the goal will be approached at some point. Council Member Adams stated that it is his understanding that the problem deals with speeding on Santiago Drive. He agreed that, if discussions are about issues that affect the parallel streets, those residents should be included. However, at this point, he believed that the most productive meeting would be to meet with representatives on Santiago Drive. Council Member Glover stated that she called the City Manager last week to let him know that he should be the point person because she keeps receiving different comments about this and so that the City Manager will be able to ensure that the changes occur. Al Bartolic, 2312 Windward Lane, took issue with Council Member Adams' statement and noted that he has children who live on Francisco Drive and Holiday Lane, and that he lives on Windward Lane, which are all parallel to Santiago Drive. He emphasized that they are affected by Santiago Drive and are in favor of slowing down traffic on Windward Lane, Francisco Drive, and Holiday Lane, as well as on Santiago Drive. He stated that Santiago Drive will affect his streets and affirmed that they would like to be included in the discussions. Council Member Glover believed that the City parallel streets can be involved in the discussions. Judy Mader, 2418 Holiday Lane, stated that the past discussions have been a cooperative effort between the four streets and that they have tried to work together to make it advantageous to each street. Noting that each of the streets have traffic problems, although Santiago Drive's problems are the greatest, she emphasized that whatever affects them, affects the other three streets. She requested that they be included in any conversations regarding these streets. In response to Council Member Debay's questions, Ms. Mader indicated that her street now has sidewalks. Council Member Debay believed that part of the problem was that pedestrians walk in the streets on Santiago Drive because they have no sidewalks. Council Member Adams stated that he has no problem with including representatives from the other streets in the discussions. He emphasized that he has only been contacted by a constituency that say there is a speeding problem on Santiago Drive. He stated that he has been trying to work with them and the City to solve that problem, and noted that he has not been contacted by anybody from the parallel streets probably because they are not in his district. He indicated that he is fine with the City Manager making them aware of the meetings. Volume 52 - Page 697 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Chris Schwartz, 2401 Santiago Drive, stated that he lives right in the middle of Tustin and Irvine Avenues, and offered his property as the meeting place. Mayor O'Neil stated that the City Manager will take that into consideration. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: .dyes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 22. UNSCHEDULED VACANCY ON THE CITY ARTS COMMISSION AND APPOINTMENT BY MAYOR OF AN AD HOC APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE. Motion by Mayor O'Neil to accept the resignation of Pat Brubaker from the Arts Commission effective immediately (term expires June 30, 2001); direct the City Clerk to advertise the vacancy pursuant to Council Policy A -2; and appoint Council Members Noyes, Ridgeway, and Adams to serve on the Ad Hoc Appointments Committee. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Adams, Glover, Thomson, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 23. REVIEW OF AUTOMOBILE SALES TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND REQUEST FROM JAGUAR FOR CITY FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING A NEWPORT BEACH DEALERSHIP. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the Economic Development Committee (EDC) reviewed the incentive program and recommends retaining the program for high tax generating businesses. They also recommend limiting the time a business can apply for this assistance to be prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. Motion by Mayor O'Neil to adopt Resolution No. 99.64 and direct staff to prepare a Sales Tax Increment Reimbursement Agreement with Jaguar that provides for reimbursement not to exceed $112,000. Council Member Glover disagreed with the statement on page 2 of the staff report which states, "EDC also recommended modifying the program to limit the time in which a dealership may apply for assistance to avoid the recent situation in which the City Council was considering a request for assistance from a dealership that has been operating profitably for some time." She reported that the City worked with this dealership for several years and that it came to Council at a late time. She believed that the City should honor its commitments. Volume 62 - Page 698 INDEX Arts Commission Vacancy (24) Res 99 -64 Automobile Sales Tax Incentive Program (40) \_J 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Regarding the motion, Ms. Wood clarified that there are 3 options under recommendation 3. She stated that the EDC also took a look at Jaguar's request but were hesitant about discussing actual numbers since Council had not directly referred this issue to them. EDC did recommend approval of some kind of sales tax sharing, but not Jaguar's requested amount. She reported that she and the economic consultants looked at the request and that, according to the resolution in which the focus is on the costs of construction to bring the dealership in, assistance in the amount of $111,700 can be justified. Noting that the resolution also provides for costs that relate to the operation of the project, she indicated that Jaguar is talking about doing business in a different way. This may result in higher operating costs. She reiterated that Jaguar is requesting $600,000 but staff was not comfortable with recommending more than $112,000. Mayor O'Neil withdrew his motion. Lawrence Williams, 416 White Cap Lane, Experienced Management Group, stated that Experienced Management Group is the management company responsible for the design, development, and launch of South Coast Motorcars. He pointed out that it has been five years since Newport Imports closed on Pacific Coast Highway and reported that Jaguar has invested a significant amount of money in the Newport Beach market to rebuild the goodwill in the Jaguar market. Mr. Williams stated that there has been a great deal of community input relative to the design and development of the South Coast Motorcars Retail Experience, and that they have indicated to Jaguar that there is a desire by the citizens to evolve the luxury car business to a retail luxury experience similar to non - automobile luxury goods. Therefore, there are costs involved that are above and beyond the traditional costs associated with operating a dealership. He indicated that he has a seven minute video of three of the soft- opening events that they conducted over the past three years for South Coast Motorcars. Mr. Williams requested that Council endorse a Sales Tax Increment Reimbursement Agreement in the amount of $600,000 in order to provide the type of high quality, personal service that South Coast Motorcars is designed to provide. Council Member Debay pointed out that the staff report indicated that South Coast Motorcars anticipates 40 percent of their sales to come directly from Newport Beach. Mr. Williams stated that the specifics regarding how to monitor that the sales are not transferred to the primary dealership have not been defined and that it would be acceptable to come to some type of contingency as it relates to that issue. Regarding leases, Ms. Wood reported that the City does now derive the sales tax from leases under State law; however, it does not come to the City as quickly since it is typically financed along with the lease. Regarding the "extraordinary expenses," Mr. Williams explained that the difference in the amounts is particularly a result of the compensation and benefit package for the staff, and the cost to incorporate a non automotive boutique into the dealership to take away the pressure associated with shopping for a vehicle. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Thomson's questions, Mr. Williams confirmed that the site is in Corona del Mar, north of Shorecliff Road and across the street from the Five Crowns Restaurant; the lease is a ground lease with the option to purchase; and the facility is a boutique/showroom that also Volume 52 - Page 699 ` i�197�1:1 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 INDEX conducts emergency, light service. Regarding the staff report indicating that "Jaguar will not establish a satellite in Newport Beach without City assistance," Mr. Williams relayed Jaguar's position that they will not be able to continue the project if they do not receive financial assistance from the City in the amount of $600,000. Mr. Williams added that some of the car servicing will take place at the Corona del Mar site, not the Mission Viejo site, and that the community indicated that they did not want plate glass windows in front of the facility. Mayor Pro Tem Thomson stated that he cannot get excited about this project. Further, that requesting $600,000 or there will be no project, does not put the City in a good position. Mr. Williams commented that the studies indicate that there is a yearning to evolve the dealership experience in the City and that financial assistance is required in order to do this. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he was at the EDC meeting when this was discussed and that EDC objected to the $600,000 request. He believed that the program is a way to entice Jaguar to the City with their own money, explaining that this is a payback over a period of time using their retail sales tax dollars. He stated that, long term, the City would still receive their sales tax dollars especially if Jaguar purchases the facility. He pointed out that the current ordinance limits this program to only dealerships and is an assistance program. Council Member Ridgeway indicated that he does not have a problem with the withdrawn motion but would increase the dollar amount over a four year period, noting that the report does not talk about third or fourth year amounts. Council Member Adams concurred with Council Member Ridgeway, but emphasized that a case has not been made for the $600,000 request. He noted that, even though there may be a yearning for a Jaguar dealership in the City, the City understands there is a significant tax benefit to the City. He emphasized that Jaguar should want to be in Newport Beach because this is where they will sell their cars. He indicated that he would be supportive of a $200,000 or $250,000 amount and suggested waiving the $50,000 in fees. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to adopt Resolution No. 99 -64 adding a provision limiting the time in which applications may be filed to the existing incentive program; and direct staff to prepare a Sales Tax Increment Reimbursement Agreement with Jaguar that provides for reimbursement in an amount not to exceed $300,000. Council Member Glover expressed the opinion that the staff report was confusing and not specific. She stated that she feels that a Council subcommittee needs to be formed to review this and come back with a recommendation. She expressed concern that the amounts are being changed and that most of the leases come from people from the east coast, thereby, the City receives no money. She indicated that she is supportive of Jaguar but wants to do this right. Mr. Williams reiterated that he was at the Jaguar Headquarters last week and that they reaffirmed the amount needed. He requested more time if Council has not received sufficient backup to substantiate Jaguar's request. Volume 52 - Page 700 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes September 13, 1999 Council Member Adams requested that it be clear whether this is linked to the Corona del Mar site or an alternative site in the City, noting that there is no entitlement for this land use on the site. Ms. Wood concurred and added that this would require a use permit. Council Member Ridgeway clarified his motion that it does not include waiving the fees, but is for a reimbursement not to exceed $300,000, paid by 50 percent of tax received per year. Discussion ensued relative to Keyser Marston Associates' approach and methodology for coming up with the $112,000 reimbursement amount. Jack Sedler, 260 Cagney Avenue, asked why Council will not give $600,000 to the building which he feels is the "biggest eyesore in Newport Beach" (Newport Club on 32nd Street) or to Bill Hamilton, owner of the Cannery. He stated that he guarantees that no one will buy a Jaguar from Mr. Williams if he opens a dealership in the City. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Adams, Glover, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Noes: Thomson Abstain: None Absent: None - None. ADJOURNMENT - 9:40 p.m. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on September 8, 1999, at 3:40 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 52 - Page 701 INDEX