HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 - Beach Fire Ring Coastal Development Permit (CDP) Application — Discussion of Alternatives - Correspondence"Received After Agenda Printed"
Agenda Item No. 15
Brown, Leilani 03/10/15
From:
Kiff, Dave
Sent:
Thursday, March 05, 2015 2:49 PM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Subject:
FW: Fire Rings
For the record.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Michael /Elizabeth Kirchner [mailto:ekirchner @sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:11 AM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: Fire Rings
Dear Manager Kiff,
We live on Seashore Drive in the area between Orange Street and the Santa Ana River Jetty.
Just recently it came to our attention that there are several new Fire Ring location Plans for this area
We are aware of some of the issues from the fire rings — in the summer months mostly, the smoke
from rings at Huntington State Beach affects our area. It makes it uncomfortable to breathe and
forces us to close our windows on and off for several hours at a time. There is not much we can do
about that. But since the City Council has two plans for putting additional fire rings in this area, we
are compelled to write and voice our opinions on the new options being proposed.
1. Additional Traffic impacts. The area from Orange Street to the River Jetty ends in a cul -de -sac.
Over the years the traffic here has become unmanageable in the summer, to the point that the NBPD
closes the area on the 4th of July. Unfortunately, most of the other summer weekends are almost as
bad. We have seen over the years that when the State Park closes either from being full, or for the
evening, people come down PCH and turn in at Orange Street to try to park — only to find no parking
available, and only one way out of the area.
The same is true when people come up from Prospect Street towards Orange Street and, not finding
places to park there, continue on towards the jetty.
The plan to install fire rings at 37th and 58th will create additional traffic problems there, which will
also impact the areas at and beyond Orange Street. If there is no place to park or use the rings at
37th or 58th streets, the beachgoers will continue on towards Orange Street and eventually end up at
the dead end cul -de -sac, thus impacting the entire area from 36th street up to the Jetty.
Additionally, there is no place to drop off or turn around at Orange Street and as mentioned, very
limited parking and access. This area is already impacted not only from the south but from the
Huntington Beach area as well. This neighborhood simply cannot accommodate any additional traffic
congestion. These fire rings and especially ones at Orange Street would create a traffic nightmare.
2. Supervision, curfew, maintenance are all issues. Police patrol is relatively limited down here, most
likely because the officers have more to deal with from 56th street south. As it stands now the 10pm
I
curfew is never enforced. The police are responsive and do a good job - but when current issues are
not being addressed due to budget constraints and /or politics, the police department does not need
fire rings added to their list of responsibilities. We do not believe it is realistic to take our limited
existing police, fire, and traffic resources and use them to manage the increased problems that will
result if the fire rings are allowed in this area, specifically when the area is already severely impacted.
Additionally, during the height of the summer season here, the cars are at a standstill not only on
Seashore, but in the parking lot and down the allies as well, and as a result, emergency access is
critically restricted.
3. This is a narrow neighborhood area with direct visitor contact. Our neighborhood has many
working residents and more recently, families with small children. All of us need to go to bed at a
reasonable hour and get up to go to work and school. Our beaches are to be vacated by 10pm but
that curfew is not enforced and as a result, right now we and our neighbors are often woken up
multiple times during the night - To add fire rings with the accompanying alcohol and partying, and
people coming and going and hanging out in the parking lots till all hours would definitely create
additional problems and certainly exacerbate the existing problems, rather than reducing them.
In contrast, the Balboa pier has a very large parking lot and encompasses a commercial area, and
CDM State Beach is a designated state park with an open public facility and adequate parking.
4. There are already existing fire rings in the adjoining area of Huntington State Beach — the public
currently has full access to the facilities available there, with extensive parking lots, concession
stands, restrooms and, no residences.
We ask you to please listen to, and support the residents who are most impacted by these possible
changes. We are adamant that Plans 3 and 5 are unacceptable and definitely not compatible with a
narrow, residential, traffic impacted beach area. Implementation of these plans would be a huge
mistake for the above mentioned reasons. Please let the Coastal commission know as well that both
plans 3 and 5 are not a viable option.
We believe than Plans 2 and 4 and 8 would be workable solutions.
If you have any questions please feel free to email us.
Sincerely,
Michael and Elizabeth Kirchner
2
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Agenda Item No. 15
Rieff, Kim 03 -10 -15
From:
McDonald, Cristal
Sent:
Friday, March 06, 2015 11:17 AM
To:
Rieff, Kim
Subject:
FW: FIRE PIT PLANS NEWPORT HARBOR SURFRIDER CLUB!
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent. Friday, March 06, 2015 10:43 AM
To: Brown, Leilani; McDonald, Cristal
Subject: FW: FIRE PIT PLANS NEWPORT HARBOR SURFRIDER CLUB!
For the record.
From: Becca Standt [mailto:beccastandtCalomail com]
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 9:15 PM
To: Dept - City Council; Kiff, Dave; erin.orahlerCobcoastaLca.g
Subject: FIRE PIT PLANS NEWPORT HARBOR SURFRIDER CLUB!
Dear City Council:
I am writing you as a concerned resident of Newport Beach and a member of the Newport Harbor Surfrider Quad club.
On February 3`tl Dave Kifff, attended our Surfrider meeting and discussed the current status of the fire rings issue in Newport
Beach /CDM. He reviewed the history and all possible plans, including the current City Council approved plan that includes 60
wood burning fire rings: 18 at CDM State Beach, 26 near the Balboa Pier area, 9 north of Newport Pier (Blackies) and 7 at
Newport Dunes Lagoon all spaced 100 feet apart.
Our club met again on the 1 & and the overall consensus is that expanding and installing fire rings is not a good idea. We are
especially concerned that the Coundil's recommended plan includes fire pits at Blackies. This is NOT a good idea.
• First of all, the beach is very narrow north of the pier and we believe that high tides would cause debris to wash
into the water and pollute the beach and damage water quality. There is already a problem with litter on the beach and
this would just make it worse.
+ Blackies is one of the most crowded beaches in Newport and adding 9 fire pits will take away precious space from
the many locals and visitors who enjoy the beach during the day.
• The fire rings will generate a lot of smoke which is a serious public health issue. Smoking is not allowed on public
beaches but a single fire ring produces way more second hand smoke and carcinogens than several hundred
cigarettes.
• The smoke will disturb residents and renters, and take away from the enjoyment of people visiting the area, eating
in restaurants and local establishments.
Newport Harbor Surfrider Quad Club is OPPOSED to the Council's preferred plan. We support plan 9. We understand that
the Coastal Act mandates the Coastal Commission to protect and encourage lower cost visitor and recreational facilities and fire
rings fall into this category, however, in view of the fact that the rings pose a threat to the environment and public health don't
the City Council and the Coastal Commission have a responsibility to look at the facts and weigh the benefit of having 60 fire
rings against the negative impacts that we know are associated with the fire rings. The original 60 rings were installed before
these dangers were common public knowledge so doesn't it make sense to re- evaluate the number.
We strongly oppose the Council approved plan — No to expanding the fire rings.
Sincerely,
Becca Standt
Michelle Williams
Christian Kent
Luke Ellis
Brooke Gehris
Cole Shattinger
Jaden Ernst
Aryton Ward
Sophia Lizarez
Max Moore
Matt Burns
Patrick Folkner
Keegan Coyne
Brigitte Yeakel
Teyha Corona
Soled Easton
Violeta Schmieder Roth
Juliet Clarke
Kyle Langdon Weyrich
Matt Lightner
Matt Faludi
Joeseph Passanonte
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Item No. 15
03/10/15
McDonald, Cristal
From:
Kiff, Dave
Sent:
Monday, March 09, 2015 11:12 AM
To:
Brown, Leilani; McDonald, Cristal
Subject:
FW: Connect Newport Beach Topic Summary Report / Fire Ring Locations - Approved &
Alternatives to Consider
Attachments: Closed- Connect NB Comments - 2015- 0309.pdf
Attachment for the record. Thanks!
Fire Ring Locations — Approved & Alternatives to Consider
Con nectNewportBeach.com
Survey Ended March 6, 2015
Comments
M
Wood burning fire pits are an unnecessary source of harmful air pollution_ The
current cha €coakonly plan (Plan 7) would seem to be the best solution for
everyone at tins time. The wood smoke -free fire pits would allow the beaches
to be more accessible and enjoyable for more people, inducting children and
others who must avoid boll tobacco and wood smoke for health reasons. and
for people who sirnply prefer breathing fresher, cleaner air. Aiming to protect
clearer. healthier air for better public health is a goal 'hat should remain a top
priority fcr all levels of government, including municipal governments.
°•- Ry an S.
�
The new location of the sire €ings is terrible. I watched yesterday as tractors
plowed under natural dunes and natural beach vegetation to create a parking
lot fiat section of beach for these ugly cement blocks strewn down the beach.
Haven't vie destroyed enrough of our natural resources?
This is a terrible plan that damages the environment and destroys one of the
few more natural condition beaches we have in Newport Beach. Whats left of
the natural dunes is now doing to be trampled by people using the fire pits and
strewn with trash And the new spacing is not even beneficial to the people
using the pits! I used the in the, old location and the old location is fine! It is a
total lose lose move for everyone. This is a real shame whoever it was that
caused this to happen and should be undone. It is environmentally destructive.
it destroys the natural beauty of our area_ It teas no benefit. Terrible decision
making city officials! Plan 6 and 7 both maintain the current number of fire pits
without destroying our natural beach so seem like the best solution of those
presented
buzz 1,
there is not enough people to monitor the increasing quan'iy of illegal
rnoroized bicycles on our beach sidewalks - who is going to monitor alt of the
fire rings proposed in plan 5? who came up with the idea to add firepils 10 our
entire beach front??
Joe V
What e. bad and costly idea to go back to woo-c-buming fire rings, and to even
consider adding more anywhere in Newport. The current Plan 7 (charcoal-
only; is the best and safest solution, and made a huge difference this past
summer after years of beach smoke in Corona del Mar. where people visit,
exercise and live, 'Wasn't a ruling by the AQMD (Air Q lafty Management
District} that identified wood - burning smoke as a KNOVVN carcinigen and
health hazard enough to stop the proposed ch&nges that the ' previous City
Council worked so hard to implement? People w€th asthma and other lung
conditions can't enjoy our beaches because of this. and who wants to get lung
,cancer from breathing smoke at the beach when smoking has been banned in
restaurants and public places? Crazy, it's 2015 people. As citizens we took to
our Government to protect public health and we all deserve clean air. Plan 7
(charcoal-only) does that and still allows for recreationial use of the beach fire
rings.
IM
Limiting air pollution is a good idea and keeping the footprint generally as it is
seems faire, than subjecting more residences to a new source of pollution
after their owners have committed themselves to a location that did not have t
% %hen they made their purchase decision.
James N.
The addition of fire rings to the Newport Pier a ~ea could only increase the
negative impacts these beaches already suffer from heavy use. Fire rings
added to this stretch of sand would interfere with current activities and greatly
.educe the appeal of one of Newpoft's most iconic beaches. Hopefulty this
Man can be eliminated and instead, if we must have fire zings. restrict them to
those areas where they currently exist.
Keep up the great work! So glad you're keeping the fire .rings!
Denise F.
Although we prefer to see the fire hags disappear completely we are willing to
co nprom se for the sake of "tradition" that many refer to & we are voting for
Dian 3 (Plana 4 as an alternate) in order to atle€n;pt to €naintain our air & water
quality at a Grade A+ level. We have progressed too far in our society to allay,+:
open burning of wood,, trash or otherwise & owe it to our health to refrain from
any type of smoke in the air, including on our "No Smokmg" beaches. installing
fire rings near the Newport Pier will greatly imoaet the busiest beach in the city
where people are already vying for space in avery small, crowded area,
Additionally_ for swimmers & surfers who are regulars at the Newport Pier. it is
really difficult to conceive hove fire rings would not pollute this world-famous
surf beach as the tide often reaches the sea wall &vvould inundate the ash-
filled ring Please do NOT ailoww installation of fire rings near the Newport Pier
and be mindful of the type of fire rings allowedi
As a peninsula res'dent I feel any expansion o= Vle fire rings footprint is not in
the best interest of those that live adjacent to the boardvwaik +oceanfront. Plans
1, 2; 3, 4 and fa all have this as an issue... so that makes them no starters.
Furthermore i believe plan 1's placement of nine new fire rings North of
Newport Pier will be a problen -i during the high Summer traffic months. Our
Ilteguards will validate that this stretch of beach is wall-to-wall popups during
this time_ Adding fire rings try this area well actually reduce the number of
persons able to safely use this already congested iinted space if the
requirement is to have 66 fire rings then I believe plan s is the best
co ;promise with wood charcoal sections. if we must get to fed, then add 5
wood b =urning fire rings at Newport Dunes as suggested in plan 1, Note: Of the
more than two dozen peninsula neighbors I have talked to about this ;got topic
not one thinks it is right to expand the fire ring footprint (even if they want the
wood burning ability hack). In their wwords... "it's not right to put a wood burning
fire ring in front of someone's house where there was not one before."
fib•
Honestly, I'm not sure what this survey is meant to accomplish. The plan was
already submitted, so all of otu comments are really a mate point; and
anything at the city council Meeting against there was ignored anyways Plan t
(submiped) guts pits in front of the parking lot at the newport pier. I live right
there. The last thing we need is more people in that parking lot, more trash in
that area and in the parking lot, and hot ashes in those rings where everyone
takes their kids. I frequent the rings north of raver jetties in HB, and
unfortunately the rings attract people teat burr: their trash, cans, etc, leave the
beach a mess, and generally (brit not &I of them' have iitt e respect for the
beach. Flan 5 just spreads the problem out across the whole length of the
peninsula. If the city has the funds, staff. and time to go ahead and police the
rings, keep the noise down after dark, keep kids out of the rings the next
morning when they are still hot, then good job, but we know that isn't the case.
Considering they don't even pohee people smoking on the beach, see the
thousands of cigarette butts in the sand on any given day, there is too much
that they will not be able to enforce. Putting rings where there aren't currently
rings is a bad idea. The beach is already trashed during the summer months;
this adds to the problem. Putting rings in front of peoples houses who bought
those houses without rings in front of them 'isn't right. People will be making
noise, getting drunk, and leave trash all over the beach, exactly like north of
river jetties is now_ (but there are no houses there, and they kick you off at
night) Saying those will not be issues is being naive I'm not a fun hater.. just
feeling for people ,olio spend 5+ million on a house and will have to deal with
fire rings in front of their house, and all of us residents who are going to Have
to deal with the mess this is going to make.
joy S.
Placing all of the bonfire pits in one or two areas is not a good idea as it will
cause overcrowding in areas that are already crowded (the pier).
Bonfire rings are a burden on the residents that live in the area and the
lifeguards who have to deal with burn patients. They may also contribute to
more people trashing the beach. Why is there not a plan to eradicate all of
them?
Our air duality isn't getting any better.
This winter we've had many No Burn Days when air duality was rated
UNHEALTHY. The AQIViD can't meet minimum standards for clean air. Pubhc
health across the region scoffers.
Then a strike at the Port strands ships pumping diesel exhaust into our air_
The drought compounds our problems. Meanwhile we debate holm to pollute
the only clean air that comes ashore_ We're kidding ourselves
Look to the icing effort to el.minate smoking in public — it's taken 5O years, but
today you cannot smoke in public , or on the beach. This issue won't go away.
Sticking it to those residents who already live near the pits is one approach..
but the ethical choice is to remove wood burning altogether
Daniel H.
I was a Lifeguard for the City of HB for 13 years. in reflecting over my 13
summers on the beach 1 can not recall one incident where the fire pits
provided a positive addition to the beach, Its visitors, local residents or the
lifeguards on :duty.
The fire rings brought added debris; care Tess users, unsafe conditions and
confrontations among visitors arguing or fighting over the limited number of
rings.
The majority of beach patrons do not understand that said, while can
extinguish a fire, it is an insulator. Most of the first aid calls we received from
the fire rings were in the morning after the patrons from the night before
extinguished their fire by covering it in sand- 100% agree that no one should
ever walk through a lire ring, but as parents or guardians are unloading for the
day at the beach I witnessed more children (i; � the excitement of a beach day;
burn their feet stepping into a ring with it having the appearance of a freshly
cleaned pit.
The medical aids, "policing" of the rings and breaking up confrontations are all
situations that distract (,arid can be prevented by not placing fire rings) the
Lifeguards from their main mission of watching the water
The information above states that the proposed plans are in place due to
,demand" does the city really feel that beach attendance will drip if fire rings
are not available to the public?
The area around the existing fire rings is filth; and a dangerous place for any
one to %valk by. Enlarging the footprint of the fire rings will
permanently degrade the beach. Please leave the fire rings as they have been
for the past 40 years if this does riot comply with AQN1D, reduce the number
of fire rings they will fit in the area where they have always been.
#fit;'
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Item No. 15
03/10/15
McDonald, Cristal
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 1:48 PM
To: Brown, Leilani; McDonald, Cristal
Subject: FW: Fire Ring Plan
For the record.
From: Jim Ure [ mailto :]UreCcbbomelconstruction.co(n]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 1:43 PM
To: Dept - City Council
Subject: Fire Ring Plan
1 received notice by post card recently that the City was requesting input from the residents on the fire ring potential
solutions. No mention was made of proposals which may put fire rings in West Newport.
I was just made aware this weekend that fire rings were being proposed (Plan 3 and Plan 5) up in West Newport where
they haven't been located historically. I would not have purchased the two houses on the beach I own if they had fire
rings (proposed to be) in front of them due to the air quality issues they create. I have chronic sinusitis and my daughter
has asthma.
Of the 9 plans on the City website Plans 3 and 5 are the worst. They will add to the bad air quality we already have at
night as we are downwind from the Huntington Beach fire rings. Please do not put Plans 3 or 5 in front of the Coastal
Commission. I support in order of preference Plan 9, 8, 7,6,2, 4, 1.
Thanks,
Jim Ure
Executive Vice President
Bomel Construction Company Inc.
8195 E. Kaiser Blvd., Anaheim Hills, CA 92808
Din 714- 279 -3204
Cel: 714-493 -5715
Fax: 714 -921 -1943
www.bomelconstruction.com
This ern til is for the intertM recipicnt(s) only and may conhaln confidential information. liepmducdoo, disacmination or dindbutiun of this message a prohibited vnle s authorised be
the sender. If you arc no, the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and you must not read, keep, use, disclose, copy or chstribute this tanail without the send&J prior
paronsion.'lhe ricsya expressed by the sender are not necessuily those of B ... od Construction Company, I.e.
"Received After Agenda Printed"
Item No. 15
McDonald, Cristal 03/10/15
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 10:29 AM
To: Brown, Leilani; McDonald, Cristal
Subject: FW: Connect Newport Beach Topic Summary Report / Fire Ring Locations - Approved &
Alternatives to Consider
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
For the record for Tuesday.
NOTES: This is not a scientific survey, but is a community engagement device. Persons can vote twice or more if they
create two or more user profiles. Survey responses may include persons who do not reside in Newport Beach. We
received two comments /concerns whereby respondents ended up voting for multiple plans thinking that making that
vote would allow them to comment on their vote (versus voting specifically for or against a plan).
Dave Kiff
City Manager
From: Connect Newport Beach [mailto:support @mindmixer.com]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 9:07 AM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: Connect Newport Beach Topic Summary Report / Fire Ring Locations - Approved & Alternatives to Consider
Topic Summary Report
A topic has closed on Connect Newport Beach
all i tai t =pl t r IF•,
do you prefer?
UPDATE: two new plans have been submitted by a group of residents on the Balboa. Peninsula. The residents stated
that they preferred these plans (Plan #S _Rr Plan #9). On January 13, 2015, the Newport Beach City Ce"ancil authorized
restoring the ability to burn wood in some or all of the City's beach fire rings. Seven plans have been prepared by City
staff to submit to the Coastal Commission. The proposed plans attempt to restore some or all wood-burni
mg fire r ngs to
Newport's beaches, while complying with certain regulations and laws. Each plan considers varying configurations and
?ocafions and you can wicw each plan by choosing the "Topic Details" tab above. For more detai €s about this issue,
piease vs *t www. new portbeachca.eov /fireringsuudate. We reviewed each plan t'nro agli "his lens: A) Does it meet the
goal of having 60 wood - burning fire rings when demand exists? B) Per the comfort of fire ring users, are the rings
placed near public restrooLms and pafking? Q is fnc beach wide enough so that other uses can occur near the rings, and
s. t.,z.:'e nlgs arc no. rc..t_•_e1y ;. _., ,a at i.- D) 7IO,. - ._ ,. c `tae. r.__u[ Co.j",.ict w'th
e, °ga'-.. °rd activities scamps, vc tey„ fag `.� .,a:? o. a.r._ior C,.aas)? r.) _,,,es __ ,tn„s',ci cement allow or
nablxc safety vehicl =, access in at era A.gs? H =: he nrgs c a,- of exist mg lif gmard towers? P) Dos tne rags'
pi ..c -- eat wesent a superv, sior_ a ;_._, u o � s yoxr tuna tnrtg in! What plans do y. tike
ordrs =lice and ivhy ?W,atcimn.'a smigttyce.aa:_ =_t, ;e -tars tot..akcr,wo c`oryou?A'co-,a.
what wi'i71i.Q yCn d0 if You WerB ..I our 5110_5, .1 '"ad tO -�nOGSe a 'a - t. aiS . tn_ Vi➢1_, tr- regilations c ."'Ws?
Surveys Subtnitted 220 Coinments 14
Survey Results
Qt: ION i
What plans do you like or dislike - and why?
Plan 7 is the current, charcoal -only approach.
° /;:
Plan 2, generally places the 60 rings in the same locations as today, but realigns them to meet the 100' distancing
requirement (spaced 100' apart). 4x8
Plan 1, the City Council - approved plan, places 18 rings at Big Corona, 26 near the Balboa Pier, 9 north of the
Newport Pier, and 7 at the western side of the Newport Dunes lagoon. 66
Plan 5, places some fire rings at CdM State Beach (14) and some near the Balboa Pier (14), and then places 32 rings
in a single line - spaced about 525' apart - from the Balboa Pier to the Santa Ana River. 39
Plan 9, places 33 wood - burning rings citywide with 18 at the Balboa Pier (12 on the east and 6 on the west) and 15 at
CdM State Beach. 3
Plan 3, places some rings at CdM State Beach, some at the Balboa Pier, and then has smaller clusters of 4 -10 rings
between the Santa Ana River and roughly 15th Street. 30
Plan 6, attempts to keep the general current footprint, but intersperses charcoal -only rings with wood - burning rings
(roughly 30 of each). 25
Plan 4, is like Plan 2, but would require Coastal Commission approval for the seasonal removal of half of the wood -
burning rings (30) from October 16 to March 14, leaving 30 wood - burning rings available during the winter months. 2v
Plan 8, places 18 charcoal only on the western side & 12 wood only on the eastern side of Balboa Pier and at CdM
State Beach 14 charcoal only close to the East Jetty & 1 l wood only spaced 100' apart. 7
53% of people participated
(22 - of 422 to-.al pa. icipa_.ts;•
133% More than your average and 762% More than the MindMixer average
Gender Breakdown i op Postal Codes
38% 92663
1I- Fnnales)
62%
92625
�
i 21, n-'l Males) 92661
4ge Breakdown
What's Next?
Don't forget to spread the news and share these results with your team!
7
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:31 AM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Fire Ring Plan Feedback
For the record.
From: K Keith [mailto:kitkeith1(&vahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Dept - City Council; %20info(@cdmra.org
Subject: Fire Ring Plan Feedback
I vote for plan 2, but will not be able to attend tonight's meeting.
Katharine Keith
621 Iris Ave
CDM
949 - 939 -3544
1
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Item No. 15
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Item No. 15
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday; March 10, 2015 11:22 AM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Fire Ring Plan Feedback
For the record.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Bud Yahoo [mailto:bmathaisel @vahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:14 AM
To: Dept -City Council; info @cdmra.ore
Subject: Fire Ring Plan Feedback
We are totally opposed to any fire rings. Charcoal is a possible option, but not if the safety issue can be addressed in
addition to the pollution issues.
We lived in the 200 block of Marguerite for five years. The smoke is a health hazard to breathing and to eyes
(contributes to cataracts). We had to have our windows closed in the evenings. Even on hot days. In addition, there
were frequent Emergency Vehicle calls to the beach because people were injured around the fires.
Decades ago, beach fires may have been a good idea. We have learned that second hand smoke is very dangerous.
Legacy feelings about some people's childhoods has to be upgraded to today's realities about the ills of pollution.
Bud Mathaisel
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Item No. 15
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:36 AM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Fire Rings Expansion - Harbor Cove Concerns
For the record.
From: Ruth Kobayashi [ mailto:ruthkobavashiCalcox.net]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 10:50 PM
To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith
Cc: Kiff, Dave
Subject: Fire Rings Expansion- Harbor Cove Concerns
Dear Newport Beach City Council Members,
I am unable to attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, March 9th, so please consider this as my public
comment for the agenda item of the fire ring locations.
Our neighborhood is directly above the Hyatt and the Palisades Tennis Club, adjacent to the Back Bay. Many
of our homes sit on low bluffs just a few feet from the Back Bay trail.
It is a a huge concern, and quite a surprise that the council would consider expanding the fire rings
beyond their original locations.
While we are very worried about breathing and smelling smoke from fire rings, we are even more worried about
being in the path of potential fires. As you know, there have been several grass fires around the back bay in just
the past year. Years ago, the brush on what is now Harbor Cove burned very quickly before the NBFD was
able to contain it. We sit in the middle of protected land, where brush is often dangerously dry. Often, vagrants
loiter and sleep in the brush nearby. We have pondered the possibility of them causing some of the fires. The
idea of adding fires so close to the back bay is beyond dangerous. It seems like an incredulous liability
for the City of Newport Beach.
We respect the City Council's desire to provide recreational amenities like fire rings for our citizens, but
we implore you to avoid areas like the Dunes, so close to protected land, a bird sanctuary, and most of all,
a neighborhood with 149 homes filled with very concerned citizens.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Ruth Sanchez Kobayashi
Volunteer Coordinator
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Item No. 15
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:36 AM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Fire Pits forced upon us
For the record.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Bill Mais [mailto:bmaisOmaisco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 9:07 PM
To: Dept - City Council
Subject: Fire Pits forced upon us
Short Version
I've lived between B and C a very long time. The fire pits were tolerable where they were. Moving them from their
historical footprint is unnecessary and unacceptable. Put them back.
Long Version
My name is Bill Mais and I live at 1013 East Balboa Boulevard, between B and C. I've lived there since the mid 60's and
went to Ensign and Newport Harbor High.
I know you've already heard complaints about the air pollution, trash, filthy sand and late night noise from the fire rings.
Over the years I've seen massive stacks of burning pallets with flames shooting upwards 100 feet, smoldering couches,
and a tipped over life guard stand that didn't burn very well. We've had gun shots and suicides. Burning text books
becomes popular at the end of the school year. One of my friend's kids was conceived there. Lot's of stuff happens at
the fire pits...
As kids we learned to avoid the fire pit area because of the broken glass, hidden coat hangers, filthy sand and those
funny looking balloons. We taught our kids to avoid the area too.
We've put up with the fire pits because they were concentrated in an area that we view as the City of Balboa and in-
front of weekly summer rentals. So mentally, we see the fire pits as part of the business district that caters to visitors.
Now everything has changed. You've moved them into the residential areas.
Unannounced, the fire pits expanded between B and C. Next, it was the plumbing for the city guy that goes out at the
crack of dawn to water down the embers. My neighbors complained about trash so we were rewarded with more trash
cans. The fire pits are so close to the high tide line that a very minimal surf washed over them and flooded the beach
with ash. If I dumped out a tiny car ashtray I'd get a very expensive ticket. The city does basically the same thing on a
massive scale and we get a sand berm that blocks our view of the ocean. The other row of fire pits no better, it's so
close to the natural vegetation that the protected plants will soon be trampled and destroyed.
I hesitate to think about what's next and I'm terrified to think about what it's done to our property values.
The City Council, voted in by the residents of Newport Beach, with the understanding you would protect us and our
community, need to focus on getting the fire pits back into their historical footprint.
Put them back where they were. Put them back where there is infrastructure to support them. Put them back were the
police can enforce the rules. Put them back where the city workers can maintain them. Put them back where they've
been for decades.
In closing I have two questions:
1) Are the police going to write tickets for smoking in public when the person is standing next to a burning a stack of
pallets?
2) If the goal of the AQMD is to make our air safer, how do theyjustify moving the fire pits closer to the permanent
residents?
Respectfully,
Bill Mais
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Rieff, Kim Item No. 15
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 1:45 PM
To: McDonald, Cristal; Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim
Subject: FW: Fire Ring Comments
Attachments: Fire Rings Newport Pier.docx
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 1:45:08 PM (UTC- 08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Fire Ring Comments
For the record.
1
March 10, 2015
Dave Kiff
City Manager
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Mr. Kiff,
I am hoping that this late note will reach you in time for consideration regarding the expansion of
fire ring locations in Newport Beach as I will not be able to attend tonight's City Council
meeting. I purchased my residence at 2210 W. Ocean Front Blvd. in 1972 and my family and I
are proud to be a part of this wonderful Newport Beach community. Prior to purchasing my
residence on the boardwalk north of the Newport Pier, my family owned a small beach cottage at
2.) street beginning in 1933, which no longer exists. I am very familiar with current and past
use of this stretch of beach and 1 am concerned that the proposal to place fire rings and
associated signage on the beach north of the Newport Pier where they have not previously
existed, will have a negative impact on the residents and properties in the 2200 block of West
Ocean Front and adjacent areas. Please note my opposition to the City Council approved plan
number 1 and, in fairness to property owners, any plan which places fire rings in areas where
they have not previously existed.
Sincerely,
J. Matt Nissen
2210 W. Ocean Front Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 544 -3554
Received After Agenda Printed
March 10, 2015
Item No. 15
From:
Denys Oberman <dho @obermanassociates.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:10 PM
To:
Kiff, Dave
Cc:
Dianebdixon; kevinmmuldoon @yahoo.com; Dept - City Council; Brown, Leilani; Denys
H. Oberman; scottrbsn @aol.com; Sharon Boles; Bill Mais; 'Linda Klein'; Fred Levine;
kbranman @gmail.com
Subject:
Fire rings- ADA propo!W and feasibility
Importance:
High
Sensitivity:
Confidential
FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD IN CONNECTION WITH MARCH 10 2015 CITY COUNCIL FIRE RINGS DISCUSSION - - --
Dave,
Pursuant to your direction, I reviewed the Staff Report to be delivered at tonight's Council meeting relating to
Fire rings.
The reaction of the AQMD Director reflected precisely my concern when you suggested that a majority or all
of the Fire rings be spaced to accommodate persons with physical disabilities.
This is clearly specious and will likely not fly. The City needs to be prepared to develop and advocate other
Reasonable alternatives, which may include some ADA- spaced rings, but certainly not the majority.
To support the health and interests of the Community, the City should be looking to fewer total number of
rings , to accomplish the 100% wood- burning objective within the historical footprint boundary. This is
properly demonstrated with the required Environmental review, and skilled expert advocacy.
Thank you.
Denys Oberman
Resident and Community Stakeholder
...................................... ...............................
Regards,
Denys H. Oberman, CEO
OBERMAN
OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors
2600 Michelson Drive, Suite 1700
Irvine, CA 92612
Tel (949) 476 -0790
Cell (949) 230 -5868
Fax (949) 752 -8935
Email: dho(o)obermanassociates.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is
legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 9491476 -0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange
for the return of the document(s) to us.