Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-1989 - AgendaCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION 10 REGULAR MEETING TO BE HELD TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 1989 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. I. PROCEDURAL MATTERS 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of May 2, 1989 4. Adoption of Agenda II. ACTION ITEMS 5. Mechanical Blowers (Report and Letters Attached) 6. Determine Agenda for Joint Meeting with City Council June 26, 1989, 2:00 P.M. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS • IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS 7. Park Bond Issue (Report Attached) 8. Status of Capital Projects (Report Attached) 9. Commission Committee Reports a. Capital Improvements - Chair Konwiser b. Street Tree - Chair Herberts c. Recreation Program - Chair Vandervort d. Oceanfront and Beach - Chair Taft e. Budget - Chair Konwiser f. Open Space Acquisition - Chair Grant g. Chair's Report 1.0.(Commission Liaison Reports a.— F._riends of Oasis - Commissioner Bremer b. Friends of the Theatre Arts Center - Commissioner Herberts c. CYC Booster Club - Commissioner Brenner 11. Recreation Division (Report Attached) 12. Park and Street Tree Division (Report Attached) • 13. Future Agenda Items • V. INFORMATION ITEMS . 14. Communication Received Re. Commission Procedures 15. Communication Received Re. Lugonia Street Volleyball Court VI. SPECIAL. URGENT OR LAST MINUTE ITEMS VII. ADJOURNMENT IN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH je, 3 Item No. 3 arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission May 2, 1989 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX ;all to Order ;ol l Cal I approval of linutes adoption of genda .ennis Court .ighting, an Joaquin fills Park Ex- Officio Member Present: Ronald A. Whitley Staff Present: Jack Brooks, Park and Tree Maintenance Superintendent Mark Dever, Recreation Superintendent Dottie Flohr, Secretary I. PROCEDURAL MATTERS Item #1 - Call to Order I The meeting of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission was called to order at 7:03 P.M. Item #2 - Roll Call I Roll call was taken. Commissioners Brenner, Grant, Herberts Konwiser, Springer, Taft and Vandervort were present. _Item #3 - Approval of Minutes - Meeting of April 4, 1989 I P Commissioner Herberts amended the minutes under Item #9, Balboa Bay Club Lease, second paragraph, to read ±26 acres, rather than 4.4 acres. Commissioner Herberts then moved the minutes of the April 4, 1989 meeting be approved as corrected. Unanimous. Item #4 - Adoption of Agenda 1 I The agenda was adopted as presented. II. ACTION ITEMS Item #5 - Tennis Court - Lighting, San Joaquin Hills Park Mark Deven reported'this item was continued from the last meeting and the Commission directed staff to develop operational procedures, regulations and signage which would relate to tennis participants the seriousness of the pro- posed project. Staff felt that revising the maximum lighting time to 9:00 P.M. and signing in large, red bold letters would serve this purpose. He pointed out that such signing has had some success at certain volleyball court locations where there have been complaints. INDEX ;all to Order ;ol l Cal I approval of linutes adoption of genda .ennis Court .ighting, an Joaquin fills Park CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 2 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. ' INDEX Mr. Deven read the rules and regulations for the proposed lighted tennis courts and noted that the residents in Jasmine Creek received this information prior to tonight's meeting. He reported he had talked to many of the residents who are not in favor of the project and, as a result, if the Commission has any doubt as to the effectiveness of the proposed regulations, the project should be denied. Chair Konwiser reported the changes made in the conditions have been an attempt by staff to mitigate the situation. He then opened the meeting to Public Testimony to those who favor the proposed lighting project. Candace Mason, tennis instructor at San Joaquin Hills Park for the City, addressed the Commission. She reported there is no lighted facility in the Corona del Mar area; players would have to go elsewhere or join a private club. She said if the courts were lit, revenue could be doubled and • she could keep all her students. There being no further testimony in favor of the lights, Chair Konwiser opened the meeting to those opposed. Andrew L. Thompson, 4 Jetty Drive, addressed the Commission. He thanked Mark Deven for answering all the calls and ques- tions and stated he was present to urge denial of the project since the courts are too close to the homes. He reported he has looked at other courts in the community and in each case none are as close to the courts as they are in Jasmine Creek. He referred to the constant stream of profanity, loud radios and occasional late parties which disturb his sleep. He also pointed out the Planning Commission considered the same idea in 1981 and it was rejected due to the same burdens on the homeowners. The situation has not changed since that time. Richard Haspel, 16 Shoal Drive, addressed the Commission. Representing the Board of Directors at Jasmine Creek, he reported the Board unanimously backs Mr. Thompson's position. Eugene Hancock, 2 Jetty Drive, addressed the Commission. He passed out a map of the area which he reviewed comparing • the court locations in relationship to the homes at San Joaquin Hills, Mariners Park and Las Arenas Park. Homes at CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH irks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 3 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX other parks located 160 -170' away from courts still have noise. The Jasmine homes are only 25' from the courts which makes it even worse. He also referred to the Planning Commission hearing in 1981 and the problems which still exist, stating he bought his home on the premise that the courts would only be used during the,day. Commissioner Grant asked Mr. Hancock for his view of the problem during supervised instruction versus unsupervised instruction. He replied it is still a problem and he wants the project denied. Judy Hunter, 8 Jetty Drive, addressed the Commission. She stated she is against the project since the lights would face their bedrooms. As it is now, her patios are very close to the courts and tennis balls hit her roof and also go into their patios which is very frightening when the players look for their balls on their premises. At present, it is too noisy and annoying; profanity is bad and radios • are at full blast, which she feels should be prohibited. She stated they, too, bought their home on the assumption the courts would not be lit. Carl Bergkvist, Attorney for Nellie Carter at 6 Jetty Drive, addressed the Commission. He thanked Mark Deven for all his assistance and reported he reviewed the courts at other locations which are not in close proximity to the homes. His client lives only 40' away from the courts and the nuisance and noise are taking away from the enjoyment of her property. He suggested other parks would be more suited to lighting and that it would be an unfair burden to light the courts at San Joaquin Hills when there are better alternatives. During discussion, Commissioner Taft stated that since he felt the developer was negligent in allowing homes to be built so close to the,courts, he would abstain from voting. Due to all the arguments against the project, particularly the loud profanity, he suggested a better location be sought. Commissioner Herberts stated she was in favor of denying the project. • Commissioner Grant stated he favored the project of having a lighted court for public use upon certain conditions and suggested looking at Grant Howald and Irvine Terrace Parks for possible lighting. SCommissioner Brenner arrived at 7:30 P.M. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 4 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Chair Konwiser advised the Irvine Terrace courts were approved on the condition they would never be lighted. Director Whitley advised the San Joaquin Hills courts are the only ones where a conduit was built during initial construction so that the courts might be lit in the future. The other courts could not be proposed because there is no underground structure to allow lighting at a reasonable cost Commissioners Springer and Vandervort agreed the situation is not workable due to the close proximity of the homes. Commissioner Vandervort recommended the courts be signed as to hours of play and no radios. Commissioner Brenner stated there is probably no location in this area where courts can be lit. Commissioner Grant agreed, noting that lights were installed at Corona del Mar High School but are not used since the public is against • them. Director Whitley advised the City paid for the lights at Corona del Mar High School which were shielded and adjusted to everyone's satisfaction, however, when Proposition 13 was passed in 1978, the School District decided they couldn't afford the utility bill. The $20,000 allotted for lights at San Joaquin Hills could pay the energy bills at the high school as a compromise. Motion x Commissioner Herberts moved to deny the proposed lighting Ayes K x x x x x project at the San Joaquin Hills tennis courts. Motion Abstain x passes. Staff was instructed to review a possible alternate site, such as Corona del Mar High School. Item #6 - Dock Construction, Newport Aquatics Center ock Construc ion, Newport Director Whitley gave a brief background of the Aquatic kquatics Center facility. The property is co -owned by the City and enter County with the City being the lead agency in administering. The local homeowners didn't want anything that would attract a large number of people. The Dover Shores Community Association wanted the fingers dredged on North Star Beach for dock purposes which was denied and precedent set that • dredge material should not be placed on a public beach. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 5 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Mr. Whitley referred to the report submitted, noting a need for a dock at the facility, however, the problem involves the dredge material, not the excavation material. Chair Konwiser opened the meeting to Public Testimony for those favoring the project. Mr. Curtis Fleming, One Whitecliffs and President of the Aquatic Center Board, addressed the Commission. He reviewed the non - profit organization's many benefits to the community and explained they cannot operate without a dock. They have received approval and permission from the Army Corps of Engineers acting as the lead agency and the Coastal Commission to excavate and build a dock. He explained the area to be dredged,and excavated which would be distributed on site resulting in no net gain of material. They just received the soils report which shows the material compatible - 12% silt and 88t sand at the lowest level.and similar to existing materials. The material would simply be distribute • from one place to another on site. Commissioner Herberts questioned the involved agencies' approval to put the materials on site and Mark Deven advised the environmental approval process did not see a problem excavating on site; the concern is over the dredging material. Director Whitley advised that the permit for the constructio of a dock has been approved by Council, however, the permit does not address the dredge and excavation material to make a lagoon. Commissioner Brenner inquired as to costs and Mr. Fleming stated it would cost $125,000 to haul, to sea and $60,000 by land. He also advised the excavation /dredge material is basically the same as that on site and that the dredge material is like that in the preserve area. Tony Melum, Tidelands Administrator for the City, addressed the Commission and explained the dredge and excavation material. Commissioner Grant suggested the excavation material be spread and the dredge material could be hauled away and then it could legally be later put under the building pad, so • why not just put it there. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 6 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX ,Bruce Ibbetson, 424 San Bernardino and member of the Aquatics Board, addressed the Commission. He stated they are proposing to spread the material, which is the same, on site. The beach was built of dredge fill and they won't be adding to it, but will be re- distributing what is there. He pointed out the Center's benefit to the community for the handicapped, teaching and Olympians; and that the dock is vital to sustaining their activities. He asked the Commission to consider the approvals and reports of the professionals. There being no further testimony in favor of the project, Chair Konwiser opened the meeting to those opposed. Lane Kolnvek, 610 Tustin Avenue and President of the Friends of the Newport Bay, addressed the Commission. He reported their organization has 1.500 members and it has always been their interest that the Bay be used for the public. They supported the Center originally and also • support the dock. They are opposed to placing the dredge and excavation material on the beach that is too high now. Excavation of the lagoon would be shallow and the sediment would be put on the beach again. When the dredge material comes up, it smells and should not be put on the beach. Ray Williams, Environmental Biology Teacher at Rio Hondo College, addressed the Commission. Mr. Williams presented an analysis of different sand using sieves and showed that the sand at North Star Beach is not of good quality and should not be added since it would not enhance the environ- ment. There would also be a maintenance problem and he suggested that if the beach is to be improved, good sand will have to be put on it. ,Frank Robinson, 1007 Nottingham Road, addressed the Commission. He clarified the conditions of the nature of the approvals from the environmental agencies which regulate activity in the Upper Bay. The project was approved with the exception of grading and dredging permits to be authorized by the City. None of the agencies involved conditioned the removal of the excavation and dredge material from the site. The option to dispose of the material on or off site was left to the discretion of the Aquatic Center or the City and /or the County as joint owners of the property. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 7 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX He stated the material in question would never be approved for other beaches. Proper use of the public beach requires a master plan to develop an improvement program. He pointed out that on the east side there is a 100' x 200' pa area. Should the excavation material be taken out, some material could be put on the pad site and eventually used as the foundation for the Phase 2 building. Mr. Robinson stated he supports the dock except for the proposed accom- modation of excavation and dredge material which should be removed from the site. Mr. Gary Lovell, 1201 Dove Street, addressed the Commission. He voiced his concern over possible toxic substance and stated that, if ,approved, no dredging or excavation material be put on North Star Beach; if so, there should be a monitoring program. Bruce Ibbetson, 424 San Bernardino, addressed the Commission again and gave his background in environmental science. He referred to the muck and mud which is silt from standing water. Since the material is the same as on the beach, they want to redistribute it on the beach. He reported that Permit #88 -305 from the Army Corps of Engineers states they, could spread over the remaining portion of the site. Bob Cannon, 19552 Sierra Canon in Irvine, addressed the Commission. As a member of the Aquatic Center Board, he stated there are times when precedents should be modified. There is a prospective use for a beach and the true bene- ficiary of the project is the community as a whole. Following close of Public Testimony, there was some discus- sion over the precedent issue. Commissioner Grant asked Tony Melum of the City if, when the Dover Shores project was refused permission to dump on the site, if in fact, this would be bringing in non - similar material from off site. Mr.. Melum.answered yes, this was true, however; this case is--d,ifferent because it is similar material already on site. Commissioner Taft stated he favors a dock but the question is the disposal of the dredge material which he prefers to be off site. • Commissioner Springer concurred and suggested a fundraiser or user fee be used to pay for removal. Eventually the 'beach will have to be improved as it gets more crowded. 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 8 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Commissioner Grant stated he•would approve with certain conditions, namely, any future dredging should be removed off site; and that the dredge material be put under the building pad subject to soil tests pursuant to the City Building Codes. Commissioner Herberts agreed the Aquatic Center is of great benefit, however, she would like to see a lovely beach and would not vote for it as a dump site. Eventually the land will be developed as a beach for recreation purposes and there would be costs to the City for the material to be removed.. She said she supports staff's recommendations Items #1 and #2 and agrees with Commissioner Taft that a master plan is necessary for the whole area. Director Whitley advised the Dover Shores homeowners feel comfortable with what exists; they are not in a hurry for public enhancement due to congestion problems. • Chair Konwiser stated that North Star Beach, although a valuable piece of land, doesn't resemble a beach and is not obstructive to homeowners. Since the City gets benefits from the Center, they could be asked to help pay for the removal. The material could be used under the proposed building as a compacted fill later. Motion x Commissioner Herberts moved to support the building of a Ayes x x x dock; prohibit the depositing of dredge material on the Nays x x x x beach; allow the excavation material on the leased property as long as it isn't built any higher than the Phase 1 building pad, balance to be removed off site. Motion fails. Motion x Commissioner Grant motioned the following conditions regulat Ayes x K x x the construction of a dock on North Star Beach: (1) Permit Nays x x the Aquatic Center to deposit dredge material on the portion of the site which forms the pad under the building expan- sion designated as Phase 2. Deposited dredge material shall not exceed 1500 cubic yards. (2) Prohibit grading within 15' of the existing block wall contiguous with North Star Lane. (3) Permit the Aquatic Center to grade excava- tion material within the limits of fill upon verification of its compatibility with the existing material as determined by soils analysis. The extent of grading will be limited to an elevation change within the limits of fill • not to exceed 12 ". (4) The material resulting from any future maintenance dredging shall be accommodated off site at the Aquatic Center's expense. (5) All material to be deposited on site shall be monitored by appropriate state and u CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 9 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX federaT agencies and that documentation shall be available for public inspection. Motion passes. Commissioner Brenner left the meeting at 10:00 P.M.. Item #7 - Appeal of Street Tree Committee Decision, 504 Appeal of Street Tree Redlands Committee Director Whitley referred to Mr. and Mrs. Winter's letter Decision appealing the Street Tree Committee's decision to remove two Silk Oak trees. Chair Konwiser opened the meeting to Public Testimony and Mrs. Freda Winter, 504 Redlands, addressed the Commission. She stated she is appealing the removal of the trees and was never informed as to why her request was denied. She presented a petition from her neighbors on the 400 and 500 blocks of Redlands supporting her request. She noted • Redlands used to be lined with Silk Oaks but now there are only four, two of which are at their property. She feels the trees are unsightly and wants them removed for their landscape project. She would like the trees replaced further back since they are now too close to the curb. Commissioner Herberts reported the Designated Tree for Redlands is the Southern Magnolia. She would have no ob- jection if the trees were replaced by the City within City boundaries and the owner pay for removal and replace- ment. Chair Konwiser stated he supports the removal and replace- ment with the Designated Tree. Commissioner Herberts explained that, should another species be desired, it can be requested of the Street Tree Committee and approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. Commissioner Taft asked if a deposit should be required to guarantee installation and Commissioner Springer explained this has never been required and should be discussed later. Chair Konwiser suggested the money be paid before removal and replacement. i Commissioners Grant, Herberts and'Vandervort agreed that should the Designated Tree be changed, 75% of the neighbor- hood agree subject to staff approval. Director Whitley 1I advised this can be implemented into Department policy. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 10 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Motion x Commissioner Herberts motioned to approve the removal and Ayes x x x x x x replacement of the two City trees at 504 Redlands, type to be determined by the June 6, 1989 meeting, and that no removal occur until a decision is made as to the type of tree to be planted. Unanimous. Commissioner Herberts explained to'Mrs. Winter that the trees will be removed after June 6, 1989. She recommended the neighbors be solicited for their input should a species other than Southern Magnolia be desired. If nothing is heard from them by June 6, the trees will be Southern Magnolia as designated on the street tree list. . -- Staff was requested to review policy regarding payment and changing tree types for the next meeting. Item #8 - Beach Volleyball Applications Beach Volley- ball Commissioner Taft reviewed the Beach and Oceanfront Applications • Committee's recommendations and announced that Recommenda- tion #2 be limited to Lugonia, not Colton Street. Following Commissioner Taft's summation of the volleyball court application process, Chair Konwiser opened the meeting to Public Testimony. Dona Colombero, 1003 E. Balboa Boulevard, addressed the Commission as to Recommendation #1 at 1011 E. Balboa Blvd. She stated she does not want additional volleyball courts in this area. If necessary, they should be located further down at 1017. Her reasons included problems with drinking; courts too close to the Pier, fire rings and park; and there are already enough courts in the afrea. Bill Mais, 1013 E. Balboa Blvd., addressed the Commission. He stated the court at 1009 was moved and he would like it replaced at the level area which is a good place to play. The court at 1017 is dirty due to ice plant and sticker weed. Mark Deven advised he received a call from Mrs. Everett at 1011 E. Balboa Blvd. who wants the court in front of -1009 120' out from the sidewalk. • Leslie Williams, 1013 E. Balboa, addressed the Commission and referred to the "semi private" court at 1017 where she witnessed the owner asking other players not to play at this site. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 11 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Motion x Commissioner Taft moved the court be no closer than 100' Ayes x x x x x x from the nearest residents and between the easterly boundary line of 1009 and westerly of 1013. Unanimous. Commissioner Taft referred to Recommendation #2, Lugonia at Oceanfront, and stated discussion should be limited to Lugonia. If Colton Street is to be considered, the proper volleyball application process must be followed. Helen McNair, 6510 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission. She recommended another site since a new play park was just built and there will be problems with children crossin at the same site as volleyball players. Joan McNair, 6510 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission. She agreed no court should be installed due to the children's play area,. • Doug Cortez, 6606 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission to oppose the Lugonia court. He said there are three tandem courts at 66th -69th Streets which attract large crowds and are used every day from morning to dusk, resulting in overflowing trash cans, etc., which is unfair to those who live there. Other courts a block down are not as heavily used. He referred to Tom Christensen's letter wherein the West Newport Beach Association supports opposition to courts proposed at Lugonia Street. He said he would like to work for rules that more fairly distribute volleyball activity and nuisance along the beach. Steve Foley, 5505 Seashore, addressed the Commission. He feels the problem is with the tandem courts which allow congregation and draw huge crowds. The more professional players now play at Colton and a community member can't get on. Doug Edlund, 6604 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission. He stated he can see ten courts from his house and the tan- dem courts are used regularly; the rest are not. He suggested one court at Lugonia and posting of volleyball rules. John Tyree, 208 Lugonia, addressed the Commission. He felt players should be reminded of the rules of challenging play. • He recommended one court at Lugonia and decentralization of the courts along the beach. Madeline Lottes, 6601 Seashore, addressed the Commission. She stated players don't want courts moved toward the river �� bed due to the windy conditions. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 12 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX Bill Thomas,, 6604 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission. He recommended a balance of courts so as not to cause over- crowding and favors one court at Lugonia. Bill Bennett, 226 Lugonia, addressed the Commission. Due to more players, he feels more courts are needed and favors two at Lugonia. Mark Deven reported he received a call from Mr. Dawson, 6506 West Oceanfront, favoring installation at Lugonia. He received a call from Gina Watkins, 6408 W. Oceanfront, and Mr. and Mrs. Lightner opposing the courts at Lugonia. Motion Commissioner Taft moved the application for the two courts at Lugonia be denied. Motion x Following discussion, Commissioner Vandervort made a Ayes x x x x x x substitute motion to approve one court at Lugonia to be • located 150' out. Unanimous. Commissioner Herberts recommended consideration be given to eliminating tandem courts. This will be reviewed by the Beach and Oceanfront Committee. Commissioner Taft referred to Recommendation #3, 12th Street and Oceanfront, and reported the original court was placed too close to the School Yard and basketball court, therefore, they are recommending installation at the end of 12th Street and Oceanfront. Bruce Torczak, 1228 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission. He stated two metal poles were removed last winter and he would like them reinstalled. In the application being presented, the School Yard is 200' away. Phillip Quarre, 1440 W. Oceanfront, addressed the Commission opposing the location at 12th Street. The courts at 12th Street resulted in large crowds, litter and profanity, denying him peaceful use of his home. Since there is a recreation facility at 13th Street, he suggested putting the courts in east of this 150 -200' from the sidewalk where they wouldn't interfere with children's activities. Mr. Deven advised that he was contacted by Roy Lewis, 1200 W. Oceanfront, who indicated his support for the court location at a minimum 150' seaward at the 12th St. end. Motion x Commissioner Herberts moved to install a court between 1224 Ayes x x x x x x and 1228 W. Oceanfront 125' out from the sidewalk. Unanimous. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 13 City Council Chambers 7 .p.m. INDEX ' Item #9 - Request for Funding for Orange Coast College Request for Funding for Sailing Base Orange Director Whitley reported the Department has been fortunate Coast to use the Sailing Base over the past 20 years for classes College at no cost and, as such, the request for funds is reasonable. Sailing.Base David Grant, Director of Marine Programs at Orange Coast College, addressed the Commission. Mr. Grant gave a. back- ground of the facility and explained they don't have a budget for the project which the state has mandated be sprinkled for fire protection. He explained the 8" water line that can provide service and need for a fire hydrant. Commissioner Grant recommended staff work with Public Works and /or Council to solve the problem. Motion x Commissioner Vandervort motioned the Commission authorize Ay* x x x x x x staff to work out a way to get an additional line at City expense. If this is not feasible, no more than $30,000 of shared funds be recommended toward this project. Motion x Commissioner Springer substituted the motion to direct Mr. Ayes x x Whitley to pursue action with the Public Works Department Nays,, x x x x to install a fire hydrant. Motion fails. The vote was called for Commissioner Vandervort's motion. Unanimous. Item #10 - Participation in Santa Ana River Corridor Master Participation in Santa Ana Plan River Director Whitley reviewed the multi- agency project which will Corridor terminate in Newport Beach at the Santa Ana River Jetty. Master Plan During discussion', Commissioner Taft stated he would want the City named in the agreement should funds be dispersed. ommissioner Grant voiced his desire to instead spend the oney to study our open space. Motion x ommissioner Herberts moved to recommend to the City Council Ayes x x x x hat a budget amendment of $6,000 be approved that enables Nays x x he City of Newport Beach to participate with other public gencies in the planning of the Santa Ana River Corridor. • lotion carries. Motion Ayes Motion Ayo CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH �2 Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 14 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. INDEX ility uest, 4 Canoe b Hoc Ocean - nt roachment izens isory mittee tus of ital jects MI mission mitte'e orts Item #11 -_Facility Use Request, IMUA Canoe Club Fac Use Mark Deven reviewed the IMUA Outrigger Canoe Club's annual Req request, pointing out that they are exemplary users of the IMU facility. Clu x Commissioner Grant motioned the request for seasonal x x x x x storage of Outrigger Canoes at North Star Beach by the IMUA Canoe Club be approved subject to the conditions presented. Unanimous. Item #12 - Ad Hoc Oceanfront Encroachment Citizens Ad Advisory Committee fro Enc Director Whitley reported the City Council established a Cit subcommittee to address physical encroachments on the Adv Balboa Peninsula oceanfront. Chair Konwiser offered to Corr x participate and Commissioner Taft so moved he be this x x x x x Commission's representative. Unanimous. Commissioner Grant requested we monitor this process so we can use a similar one in other areas where there are like problems. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS Item #13 - Status of Capital Projects Sta Cap Commissioner Grant and Chair Konwiser stated they preferred Pro the previous form of reporting capital projects as long as it is more legible. Item #14 - 1989 -90 Budget 198 Bud Director Whitley reported the City Council will be con- sidering the budget at their May 22 Study Session. The Commissioners are invited to attend. Item #15 - Commission Committee Reports Corr Com (a) Capital Improvements - No report. Rep (b) Street Tree - Chair Herberts reported'Arbor Day was a wonderful success and complimented:staff on planning and implementation and suggested a thank you note be written to the school. ility uest, 4 Canoe b Hoc Ocean - nt roachment izens isory mittee tus of ital jects MI mission mitte'e orts CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 15 City Council Chambers 7 p.m. I INDEX She reported Mrs. Hoffman requested a Coral Tree at 1444 Santiago be removed. It has been removed without authorization and Director Whitley will investigate and report back. Commissioner Grant recommended the Designated Tree Lis be formalized, updated and approved as an official street tree list. Commissioner Herberts reported developers and remodele s are taking out trees, as an example, on Begonia, cementing and not replacing them. Director Whitley will investigate. (c) Recreation Program - Chair Vandervort reported the new programs for summer are presented for the Commission. (d) Oceanfront and Beach - No report. • (e) Budget - No report. (f) Open Space Acquisition - Chair Grant asked that this be brought back for formal direction and approval.. (g) Chair's Report - No report. Item #16 - Commission Liaison Reports Commission Liaison (a) Friends of Oasis - No report. Reports (b) Friends of the Theatre Arts Center - Commissioner Herberts reported the play, Lu Ann Hampton, is great and runs until the end of this week. She passed out I the new schedule, pointing out that Zorba the Greek will run from June 2 -- July 2. (c) CYC Booster Club - No report. Item #17 - Park and Street Tree Division Park and Street Tree Commissioner Grant questioned the path and gate to be Division installed at Grant Howald Park to the school. Director Whitley advised this is being done through the capital • improvement process. Commissioner Grant asked that the gate be put in now since people want an access to open playing space. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • arks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Page 1.6 City Council Chambers 7 .p.m. INDEX Recreation Division Future Agenda Items Communication Received re. Inspiration Point Facility Inspections Item #18 - Recreation Division Director Whitley reported Mark Deven will be leaving the City for the City of Anaheim to further his career. He has done an outstanding job with the City and we will'be sorry to see him leave. Mr. Deven said that it was a difficult decision since the City has meant a lot to him, since he has been here. Chair Konwiser, on behalf of the Commission, congratulated him and pointed out the great job he has done here. Item #19 - Future Agenda Items Due to the Fourth of July Holiday, the Commission's July meeting will be held July 11, 1989. V. INFORMATION ITEMS Item #20 - Communication Received re. Inspiration Point Letter received and filed. Item #21 - Facility Inspections ,Director Whitley reviewed the facil'ity inspection process identifying areas that need work. Staff will recommend a formalization and schedule for future field closing for renovation. VI. SPECIAL, URGENT OR LAST MINUTE ITEMS VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission adjourned at 12:55 A.K. The agenda for this meeting was posted on April 24, 1989 at 9:30 A.M. outside the City Hall Administration .Building. Dottie Flo hr, Secretary Recreation Division Future Agenda Items Communication Received re. Inspiration Point Facility Inspections Item No. 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 0; Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department E i DATE: May 31, 1989 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: MECHANICAL BLOWERS A few months ago, the Commission had reviewed the Ordinance that identifies and regulates the use of mechanical blowers used primarily by gardeners. Since that time a number of individuals have expressed'a desire to prohibit their use in the City. Therefore, a further review and recommendation to be made to the City Council is requested of the Commission. Ronald A. Whitley .6.04.025- 6.04.055 HEALTH AND SANITATION' 1 glass, carton, container, box, bottle or jar, and other articles or materials of a similar nature normally discarded as household or business refuse. (Ord. 1558 § 1, 1974: Ord. 1403 § I (part), 1971). 6.04.025 Commercial Refuse Bins Defined. The term "commercial' refuse bin" shall mean any container, which requires special collection equip- ment, and is designed for the storage of garbage or refuse generated by any business which cooks or prepares food or sells food which is not fully wrapped or packaged. (Ord. 82 -29 § 1, 1982). 6.04.030 Cuttings Defined. The term "cuttings" shall mean and include trimmings from trees or shrubs, plants, grass cuttings, or removed or discarded branches, shrubs, or plants. (Ord. 1403 § 1 (part), 1971). - 6.04.040 Beach Defined. The term "beach" shall mean and include all the shore of the Pacific Ocean lying southerly of the most southerly line of the public street nearest and parallel to the ocean and all the shore of the harbor, and any bay or channel in the City of Newport Beach. (Ord. 1403 § I (part), 1971). 6.04.050 Nuisance Declared. The accumulation and existence of gar- bage, refuse or cuttings on any private premises, on, in, or upon any beach, street, alley or other public place within the City may be declared to be a nuisance. No person who owns, controls or occupies any premises in the • City shall cause, permit or allow any such nuisance to exist thereon. (Ord. 1403 § 1 (part), 1971). 6.04.055 Use of Mechanical Blowers. A. MECHANICAL BLOWERS. Whenever used in this code, the words MECHANICAL BLOWER shall refer to a device which is used, designed or operated to produce a current of air by mechanical, electrical or other means to push, propel or blow cuttings, refuse or debris. •-B. USE OF MECHANICAL BLOWER. Mechanical blowers may be used, and operated within the City to sweep or clean any surface of cuttings, refuse or debris only if the cuttings, refuse or debris so swept or blown are not left in or upon any street, public place or right -of -way, public beach, or on the shore, or in the waters of Newport Bay. C. VIOLATIONS: i. Any person who uses a mechanical blower and causes or permits cuttings, refuse or debris swept or blown by the mechanical blower to be left in places contrary to the provisions of subsection B hereof is guilty of at.. infraction. ii. Any person who operates any mechanical blower between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. shall be guilty of an infraction. (Ord. 87 -I5 1. 1987: Ord. 83 -23 § I. 1983 : Ord. 1828 a I. 1979). (Newport Beach 10.97) 124 ............. 1... Newport Beach Parks, Beach and Recreation Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Members of the Commission... �6 We too, strongly urge the development • •r of an ordinance to prohibit the use of these ear —drum splitting s {{ noise and air poluting blowers. They dont remove dust,dirt or leaves — they in their noisey manner just blow it around from one area to another and in the process add to the air polution. :, • ' ...'s ': tir ".:. Sincerely... Mr. /8o -Mrs. John W. Emory �p 1I May 12, 1989 ' {• ! THE DIRT ON NEWPORT BEACH The peace and tranquility of Newport Beach and ad- jacent cities was suddenly shattered by the Newport Beach City Council about a decade ago. They approved the appeals of gardeners to blow the debris they had loosened up onto the adjacent lawns, houses, and streets: thus avoiding sacking up and haul- ing the debris to the dump. Maybe they saved about five minutes per stop. Our elected officials, in their infinite wisdom, decided . that their constituents would be best served by submit - t}ng to the ear splitting noise and the clouds of dust enter- _z their houses. Whv? ., Did the gardeners have a powerful lobby or a persua- sive spokesman? I can't believe that it must be that the Council simply forgot that its first obligation was to benefit the community. I have heard many people, including current Coun- cil members speak against this practice. None were in favor of it. We should speak up and let our council members know that we disapprove of these noisy, dusty devices. Those of you who want this acted upon have been asked by the Parks, Beach and Recreation Commission • to write or call our office or theirs. Newport Beach Parks, Beach and Recreation Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Members of the Commission... �6 We too, strongly urge the development • •r of an ordinance to prohibit the use of these ear —drum splitting s {{ noise and air poluting blowers. They dont remove dust,dirt or leaves — they in their noisey manner just blow it around from one area to another and in the process add to the air polution. :, • ' ...'s ': tir ".:. Sincerely... Mr. /8o -Mrs. John W. Emory �p 1I E Helmut Weiss 1230 Berkshire Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 Mr. Ron Whitley Parks, Beach and Recreation Department City Hall Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Dear Mr. Whitley: May 3, 1989 I believe it is about time to recognize lawn blowers as an intolerable nuisance. The noise and dust pollution that these machines generate -far outweighs whatever marginal convenience they may contribute to professional landscape maintenance. If one considers, as I do, noise a worse offender than natural dust, one might hope that electrically powered quiet blowers will eventually • replace the noisemakers now, in use -- maybe even lawn edgers. However, nothing of the sort will ever happen unless the existing noise makers are outlawed. Please have that courage I Sincerely, kwvvd Helmut Weiss P (OUNCIL AQtWA THE DIRT ON NEWPORT BEACH • The peace and tranquility of Newport Beach and adjacent cities was suddenly shattered by the Newport Beach City Council about a decade ago. They approved the appeals of itinerant gardeners and some local ones to blow the debris they had loosened up onto the adjacent lawns, houses and streets. They no longer had to sack it up and haul to the dump. Maybe they saved about 5 minutes per stop. Our elected officials, in their infinite wisdom, decided that their cons ti tuents would be best served by submitting to the ear splitting noise and the clouds of dust entering their houses. Why? Did the gardeners have a powerful lobby or a persuasive spokesman? I can't believe that,so it must be that-the Council simply forgot that their first obligation was to benefit the community. I have heard many voices, including current Council members, against this practice but none for it. Will someone please put it on the agenda for a vote to rescind? Thank you, �co RECE vED O.K. Englund f NOV 11 1988 1 11 andc CR t. IT r 12, r, r1lon nu�Cr Cry 4 "r -P•cy ro •r`.� > y 3 S ❑ gz.�S rv, Dfr. 0 4' „$HDfr. ❑ Pian,.fnD Dfr. J P� ! {re t;l11C1 Dir • _2-3 Item No. 7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department DATE: May 31, 1989 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: PARK BOND ISSUE Recommendation: Transmit to the Park Bond Committee the attached report with the specific objective of reviewing and making recommendations on the requested areas of responsibility. Discussion: The attached represents all materials and input that the City Council received on the proposed Park Bond. Even though it was determined to hold off on having a bond election, there are areas that the Commission should analyze and follow up on with regard to future park development. It is felt that this can best • be pursued by having the Commission subcommittee meet and make recommendations for the consideration by the Commission. Ronald A. Whitley c CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH . OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER May 23, 1989 TO: PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: PARK BOND ISSUE Attached is a copy of the report from the Budget Committee concerning a proposed Park Bond Issue for the City of Newport Beach. Section IV, Subsections A through'F suggest certain assignments for the P, B & R Commission. It is, therefore, being requested that you review the attached report with your Commission and request them to input on the responsibilities requested by the City Council contained in Section IV, Subsections A through F. W ROBERT L. WYNN RLW:kf Enc. • toe iE Study Session qyClarence J. Turner Agenda Item No. 6 1 LJ M E M O R A N D U M ' DATE: April 24, 1989 TO: Newport Beach City Council Members FROM: Budget Committee City of Newport Beach SUBJECT: PARK BOND ISSUE Discussion: Attached is a report from the Budget Committee regarding the proposed Park Bond Issue. The Committee recommends that no Park Bond Issue be placed on the November 1989 ballot and that additional data be developed to determine if such an issue should be considered for the November 1991 ballot. The attached report provides justification for our recommendation. by: Jo Cox, Jr., Member Bu et Committee C. y of Newport Beach FM 1507 ANTIGUA WAY. NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92660 nPair.F PmnNF• 799 -dd ?n MFSSAGE PHONE: 631 -3947 • 16 U April 24, 1989 BOND ISSUE FOR PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to review the practical feasibility of placing a bond issue before the voters in November, 1989 to acquire additional parks and open space. II. CONCLUSIONS: Due to time constraints and an inadequate analysis of potential park land requirements it is recommended that no bond issue be placed on the November, 1989 ballot for purchase of parks and open space. III. DISCUSSION: P1 A. Historical Overview: On May 11, 1988 a letter was forwarded to the City Council (Exhibit A) suggesting, that the Council look into the possibility of securing additional parks and open space by way of a bond issue. The Council reviewed the request and forwarded same to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department for analysis and recommendations back to the Council. In February, 1989 the Council received a report from the Parks, Beaches and Recreation director (Exhibit B) which the Council turned over to the Budget Committee for further review and recommendations. The Budget Committee reviewed the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department's report. As a result of our analysis (Exhibit C), which includes Councilman Cox''s view that more public input is required before proceeding and that of Councilwoman Watt who pr ented, in writing (Exhibit D), a strategy for a tl3orough analysis 'of our park requirements, we believe that more work is needed before going to the voters with this request. Bond Issue /Parks April 24, 1989 Page 2 IV. ACTION REQUESTED: F It is respectfully requested that the Council return this program to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department with instructions to perform the following: _ A. Evaluate our present park land requirement (one acre per one thousand) and determine if it is adequate. B. If it is adequate, then this formula needs to be projected into the future to determine if it can be met in say the year 2020 and beyond assuming that the City and the County continues to experience even a modest population increase. The idea being to think far into the future and commit ourselves to preserving the quality of life for those who may succeed us. C. Prepare reasonable estimates as to how our park requirements might be met from conventional sources. D. Explore in greater detail the central park versus mini park concepts outlined briefly in Exhibit C. E. Once the requirements have been established, prepare a program designed to gain the cooperation/ input of the public to, help ascertain the commitment which the public may have to the program. Something like the Outreach System the Council employed to dialogue with the public while updating the general plan might be a starting place. F. Report back to the Council every six months with a status report. c 6M-, Clarence J. Turner _ CrECE EXHIBIT A STUDY SESSION ITEM NO. 5 May 11, 1988 Mr. Robert Wynn, City Manager City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Mr. Wynn: It seems that the subject of perserving open space comes up at virtually every public hearing. Always there is a reoccuring theme. The people would like to have the open space preserved but the space in question belongs to a private owner and the underlying theme is that the city should buy it or the property owner preserve it for the benefit of the public. Personally, I have no problems with the city buying property for open space providing that we have the financial wherewithal to accomplish that goal. On the other hand, it is difficult to require private property owners to give up a portion of their property for the public unless there is a major development involved. Quite obviously., there are few, major developments left to occur within the City of Newport Beach. Yet, the requests for more open space continue to roll in. Perhaps it is time to place a bond issue on the ballot and determine if the people really want to tax themselves for additional park land within the city. It is my understanding that there was such an issue on the ballot a few years ago, but it failed to pass by a few percentage points. Maybe the climate has turned around and this time such a proposition could receive the required votes which I believe is two - thirds of the votes cast. In any event I would study session so that to pursue the idea. discuss the timing tc place such an issue c what the costs are appropriate and any a< council would be inter like to see this item placed on the next council can decide whether or not it wishes May I also suggest that you be prepared to determine i* there is enough time left to n the ballot for the November 88 election, , any historical data which might be Iditional information which you may perceive •ested in receiving. There are numerous candidate sites throughout the city which could fulfill this need. Some are well known and I suspect some • are not so well known. If the city has such an inventory it might be helpful to bring those along for a cursory review. I n U4 1507 ANTIGUA WAY • NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 u OFFICE PHONE: 751 -4420 MESSAGE PHONE: 631 -3947 n u May 11, 1988 Mr. Robert Wynn Page 2 would not suggest a major effort along these lines until the council decides whether or not this is an appropriate action item. Thank you for your cooperation. sincerer, - Clarenc Turner Newport Beach City Councilman CJT /mn • 6 r e • STUDY SESSION ITEM NO. 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER May 23, 1988 T0: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: BOND ISSUE FOR PARK AND OPEN SPACE Councilman Clarence Turner has suggested that the City Council review the advisability of placing on the November ballot a bond proposition to acquire open space and /or parks for the city. His memo suggests that information be provided concerning other bond propositions in the city and whether sufficient_tjme exists to place a proposition on the November 88 ballot. _ First, the last date on which a• proposition can be placed on the November ballot is Monday, August 8, 1988. This gives approximately 10 =11 weeks to organize and prepare the necessary material for the election. Second, the city on June 6, 1972 placed three bond propositions on the ballot. One (Prop F) was for $3,560,000 for Park and Recreational Purposes including the acquisition of sites and provision for open space. was measure ered received 58.3% "yes" votes and therefore failed since 66 2/3' Y measure (Prop G) was for $2,425,000 for Park and Recreational Facilities and improve- ments, Furnishings and Equipment. This measure received 56.5% "yes" votes and was The third Purposes andOpenSpace. This (Prop w $3,000,000 measurereceived53.17 Oyes" votes and also Recreational On March 8, 1977 the city voted upon a bond issue for $7,130,000 for land acquisition and park improvements. This proposition received 61.5% "yes" votes and therefore failed the 66 2/3 requirement of the election's code. In all of the bond issues stated herein the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission compiled a list of projects for acquisition and /or improvement. If the council desires to proceed on the bond issue, it will probably be appropriate to request the opinion of the P.B. &R. Commission and request a list of projects for funding by the bond issue. As indicated above this should be done within 11 weeks ( to meet the requirement of the election's code. ROBERT L. WYNN • C� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - - — -- Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department DATE: May 18, 1988 TO: Robert L. Wynn, City Manager FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Implementation of the Recreation and Open Space Element The listed locations are open space projects that could be included in a general obligation bond issue. 1. Banning Environmentally Sensitive Area 2. Semeniak Slough Environmentally Sensitive Area �� ����� r,�t „�• 3. Westbay Environmentally Sensitive Area- - 4. Castaways, 10 acres 5. San Diego Creek Open Space, 22 acres �- 6. Eastbluff Remnant 7. Buck Gully, 49.4 a res " l•'!. !. F=r+�t �'l*a.iG F� '(, (:zv�•c.- cF.ar/. /J, ti�cst..c -s �.�� � '�F• C-G. The implementation plan proposes: C17 r,� /ti�•�<�,. Private Open Space Management Open Space-and environmentally sensitive area.management guidelines will be established by the City to address appropriate land uses and management techniques for sensitive areas. The City's existing Open Space Zone should be amended so that it can be applied both as a primary zone and as an overlay zone in conjunction with other zones such as the residential-zone. The overlay zone could then be adopted for private open space areas with appropriate management guidelines. Potential properties include lower Buck Gully, lower Morning Canyon and properties which include environmentally sensitive areas as a part of a development area such as Westbay, Newporter North and Buck Gully and are designated in the Specific Implementation Recommendations. Management guidelines should detail: • permitted land uses • buffering of land uses permitted level of public access impacts from adjacent areas such as drainage and runoff acceptable improvements for physical access or emergency safety repairs appropriate management responsibility appropriate building setbacks permitted landform modifications • Parks are proposed in the plan as residential development occurs. This has been our traditional way of developing our park system over the past 10 -15 years. Our system has had important additions in the past four years and although we have deficiencies in older sections of the City, our overall park and recreation opportunity to the public is in good shape. D...+a .4 0 +,+ pv EXHIBIT B CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH- Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department February 27, 1989 STUDY SESSION ITEM NO. TO: Mayor and City Council RECYCLED REPORT — 3/13/89 FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: .BOND ISSUE FOR PARKS AND OPEN SPACE BACKGROUND On June 27, 1988, the City Council directed the staff to work with the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission to prepare a list with appropriate costs that could be possible projects for a park and open space bond issue. The Commission and a subcommittee, formed specifically to accomplish this task, has met and discussed this topic a number of times. To present this matter in an accurate and helpful manner, it is necessary to review and analyze the Recreation and Open Space Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and determine projects recommended for implementation that merit consideration for a bond issue. ".' RECREATION'AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS NE PORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN In February of 1985, the. City Council adopted a revised Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. This Element was produced with significant involvement of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and staff prior to the adoption by the City Council. An important segment of the Plan was an implementation program whereby deficiencies in the park system could be acquired and developed in the future. i COMPLETED PROJECTS Using the Implementation Plan, the following indicates successful completion since 1985: 1. West Newport Park developed. 2. Bonita Creek Park developed. 3. Mouth of Big Canyon acquired through Park Dedication procedures. • 4. Lincoln School - Leased and currently being refurbished. 5. Old School Park. 6. Oasis Expansion, 2 acre acquisition. -2- 7. Marguerite View Park 8. West Newport Community Center FUTURE PROJECTS ` As identified in the Plan, the following are projects that have not been implemented to date. Specific comments are provided for each project. Acquisition and Development Costs 1. Banning Community Park 20 acres 0 2. Banning View Park 1 acre 0 3. Banning Neighborhood Park 4 acres 0 All of the Banning projects will occur as residential development is approved. As there is not a need for these locations until residential projects are built, it is felt that it would be prudent to acquire and develop the public areas in our traditional manner. 4. Semeniuk Slough Undetermined Still involved in litigation. 5. Castaways Park 10 acres $35 -'$70 million Possible bond project if it is desired to acquire and develop a community park of'20= 60'Acres. 6. Westbay 4 acres 0 Included in the proposed County. of Orange Regional Park. 7. Newporter North View Park 4 acres $20 - $40 million Possible bond project if it is desired to acquire and develop a community park of 20 -30 acres. 8. Newport Village Neighborhood 4 acres Park CWill occur as development rights are granted. 9. Bayview Landing 2 acres $1 - $2 million • Will' occur as development rights are granted. 10. Buck Gully 30 acres Undetermined 11. Cal Trans West 4 acres $5 million c . I -3- • POSSIBLE BOND PROVISIONS It has been indicated that consideration should be given to include, in a bond issue the possibility of: 1. A reserve fund (amount to be determined) for acquisition of small parcels as they come on the market to be developed into mini parks. 2. A development fund for property acquired through the Park Dedication,Ordinance. 3. Maintenance funds to be used to maintain new acquisition and development. 4. An acquisition fund to purchase privately owned land for park or open space purposes. COST ESTIMATES Land Land costs would range from $500,000 to $1,000,000 per acre depending on location and appraisals may determine different numbers. Development from 00 an acre of development. Maintenance Range from $10,000 annually per acre for minimal maintenance to $50,000 annually per acre for full service manicured maintenance. FINANCING ALTERNATIVES ' 1. General Obli atibn Bond - Requires two - thirds vote of the electorate. For off year a of measures the cost is estimated to be $30,000 Cit and, presented t btheoCountylClerkubysearly June pforvNovem e berelection. As previously mentioned, the City on June 6, 1972 placed three bond propositions on the ballot. One (Proposition F) was for $1,560,000 for Park and Recreational Purposes including the acquisi- tion of sites and provision for open space. This measure received 58.3% "yes" votes and therefore failed since 66 -2/3 "yes" vote was required. The second measure (Proposition G) was for $2,425,000 for Park and Recreational Facilities and Improvements, Furnishings and Equipment. This measure received 56.5% "yes" votes and was defeated. The third measure (Proposition H) was for $3,000,000 for Park and Recreational Purposes and Open Space. This measure received 53.1% "yes" votes and also failed. On March 8, 1977 the City voted upon a bond issue for $7,130,000 • for land acquisition and park improvements. This proposition re- ceived 61.5% "yes" votes and therefore failed the 66 -2/3 requirement of the election's code. �r � -4- • 2. Lease Back - A sufficient amount of information has not been obtained to determine if this funding technique is viable for acquisition purposes. 3. Foundation, Non - Profit - Foundations for open space purposes are historically regional, state and national in scope. A grass root local foundation would probably identify many interested parties but their capability to generate large amounts is questionable. 4. Park Acquisition Agreements - Technique whereby future development is reviewe and advance dedication of park requirements can be negotiated with major landowners. j1 SUMMARY The City Council should determine: 1. Specific locations for acquisition and development. 2. Determine approximate size of selected locations. 3. Determine level of development for specific locations. 4. Determine if maintenance funds are desirable in a bond proposal. In conclusion, our park system has grown significantly in the past decade. Through normal budget procedures it can be assumed that additional parks will be acquired and developed in the fashion that has enabled us to reach the current level. If a strong desire is determined to acquire larger amounts of park or open spaces, the people, through the bond process, could be given the opportunity to decide this issue. As an alternative, the City Council could negotiate park and open space agreements. l � M CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT February 16, 1989 TO: Ron Whitley, Parks, Beaches and Recreation.Department Director FROM: Patricia Temple, Principal Planner SUBJECT: Park Bond Initiative Information As you requested, the following information is provided regarding the entitlement and park dedication for the sites anticipated to be involved a potential park bond initiative. Castaways, The Castaways Site is a 65 acre site and lis allocated 151 dwelling units in the Newport Beach General Plan. The Recreation and Open Space Element designates ten acres of the site for a special view park. The dwelling units allocated to the site would result in a 1.7 acre dedication, and the mandatory bluff setback will result in an additional 3.8 acres left as open space. The balance of the 10 acres would either have to be acquired from The Irvine Company or negotiated into the public domain. Newporter North: The Newporter North site is 88 acres in size and is allocated 212 dwelling units in the General Plan. The Recreation and Open " Space Element designates 4 acres for a special view park. The dwelling units allocated to the site would result in a 2.4 acre park dedication, and the mandatory bluff setback will result in an additional 1.8 acres left as open space. This site also contains a significant archaeological site (t25 acres) which is designated as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. CalTrans West: The CalTrans West site is approximately 11 acres in size and is allocated 154 dwelling units in the Newport Beach General Plan. The .Recreation and Open Space Element designates ±2 acres for a lineal view park. The dwelling units allocated to this site would result in park dedication or fees for 1.7 acres. Bayview Landis: The gross size of the Bayview Landing site is 19 acres, but the size will be reduced by the various right -of -way dedications required for the Coast Highway widening project and the improvements at the intersection of Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. The General Plan designates the upper pad level ( ±10 acres) for Recreational and Environmental Open Space, with the entire area dedicated to the 'City at the time development of the lower pad level is approved. The lower pad is designated for Retail and Service Commercial, and is allocated 10,000 sq.ft. • �p for restaurant use or 40 „000 sq.ft, for athletic club use. �- you need any additional information please give me a call. April 11, 1989 Claiknnce Turner EXHT.BIT C TO: Members of the Newport Beach City Council FM: Clarence J. Turner RE: PARK BOND PROPOSAL The Budget Committee (John Cox, Bus Turner, Don Strauss) met to discuss the proposed Park Bond Proposition. After a thorough discussion of the issue, it appears that there are three possibilities which should be pursued. We further agreed that it would be helpful to informally poll the balance of the Council to obtain their viewpoints before proceeding. The three main possibilities to pursue are as follows: 1. Central Park Concept. One possibility is to pursue a Central Park concept. Meaning, that a site such as the Castaways or the Newporter North property could serve as a major park for all of Newport. There are pros and cons for both of these properties which need further analysis; A. Castaways This is an excellent location and provides an excellent view for a park. Also the Irvine Company has indicated a willingness to sell a portion of the site to tie in with the park dedication property that 'they will have to dedicate if they develop the property. The price is approximately $1,000,000 per acre. Apparently they are willing to sell all or a part of it providing that they get the proper credits for their park dedication. Roughly, the perimeter of the site is to be dedicated for open space park land if and when the entire site is developed. A down side to this particular location is the cost per �. acre. It is approximately twice what the City allocates for the value of park land. Further, it is relatively close to the West Bay which will soon become a reality. Although, I think that this could be overcome by changing the use of the Castaways park. If 1507 ANTIGUA WAY • NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 OFFICE PHONE: 751 -4420 MESSAGE PHONE: 631 -3947 • April 11, 1989 Page Two the West Bay Park goes as I think it will go, that will become a passive park and the Castaway's property could become an active park for such uses as soccer, baseball and other sports. B. Newporter North Although this site is relatively close to the Bonita Creek site, it still has potential for a central park. In addition it has several features which should tie in nicely with a park. There are wet lands, archeological sites and some bluffs which should never be used for anything except open 'space anyway. A combination of these features along with the usable areas may be a way to go. To my knowledge the Irvine Company has not been approached to determine if they would consider selling the property to us, not to mention the price per acre. The above are only two potential central parks which we discussed. There may be others or we may decide that neither,of these are practical. Ire2. Mini Parks - Reserve Funds Under this proposal, we would consider going to the public for a bond issue which essentially would establish a reserve fund to purchase mini parks as they become available. In this scenario I would envision some kind of an allocation of money, by district, to avoid competition for those funds and to establish a set of rules ahead of time so that when a park site is available within a given district, it becomes a matter of determining whether the money is available or not to purchase same. 3. Combination Under this situation, it is proposed that we consider a combination of a central park system combined with a mini park fund. This would mean going for a larger parcel and at the same time establishing a reserve fund for the acquisition of mini parks as they become available. The down side to this method is the amount of money involved. It could be high and thus scare off the voters. Councilwoman Watt and Councilman Cox have offered an alternate plan to determine how the City should approach the bond issue. Councilwoman Watt's proposal is attached for your review. Councilman Cox verbalized his proposal. • In the�case of Councilman Cox he believes that we should have an ►,I • April 11, 1989 Page Three "outreach" program to determine what the people want and what they will support. As I understand his proposal this would entail the gathering of a considerable amount of information, holding public hearings, gaining support and /or opposition with the final goal towards finding out what the people want before proceeding. Both the Watt and Cox method will entail time and there will not be sufficient time to pursue either of those proposals before the scheduled November election. If we are to pursue one of those proposals, then I would suggest that we put off placing a decision before the voters until 1991. I, and I believe Councilman Cox and Mayor Strauss also believe, that a bond issue cannot receive the 66 2/3 support needed to pass in a general election. I believe we are all in agreement that we will be lucky to pass such an issue even in a special election and only then if a proper campaign is conducted. There is also the question of 'Foundation support. Before this can be ascertained we must come up with some kind of a plan to approach the foundations and then proceed from there. M 'a 0 �D • 14- EXHIBIT D — — • March 29, 1989 TO: City council Budget Committee FROM: Jean Watt SUBJECT: OPEN SPACE /ACQUISITION BASIC PREMISE: Something other than status quo needs to be done to achieve optimal open space and view preservation /acquisition. Open Space Element should be brought up to date; New areas for acquisition or preservation should be identified; New processes for implementation and /or acquisition should be identified and promoted. SPECIFIC GOALS: I. WEST NEWPORT - Service Area 1 - Significant lack of specific plans. A. Develop Open space Plan for all of area north of PCH and West of Superior to Santa Ana River (including County property in Newport Beach sphere of influence). B. Develop goals for preservation of wetlands between bluffs and Santa ana River. a. Work with State Coastal Conservancy to identify and preserve wetlands adjacent to River (including 90 acres to mitigate flood control project). b. Work with County in preparation of LCP. c. Work with Santa Ana Wetlands Park Committee to develop and promote plans for wetland park contiguous with County's Fairview and Talbert Parks. C. Develop plans for maximizing open space through General Plan and zoning ordinances. a. Rezone 30 acres of Newport Oil Company property in Newport Beach from commercial to residential - with 3 -4 acres of park dedication. b. Plan for viewshed ordinance requiring bluff -setbacks of C 200'. D. Identify open space parcels so that a continuous greenbelt is provided with walking and bike trails from Santa Ana River to Newport Boulevard. • E. After planning for maximizing open space through General Plan and zoning ordinances, targ6t acres for acquisition through combination of BOND funds and FOUNDATION funds as available. Seek leaseback arrangement or development agreements in order to save desired property over a period of time. 1& OPEN SPACE /ACQUISITION • March 29, 1989 Page 2 II. -CASTAWAYS - Significant as Central Park /Upper Bay Open Space System Historical significance/ recreation /views /vistas A. Develop maximum and minimum open space plans. 1. Plan for minimum of 507. open space or 30 acres. a. Seek 50% open space through General Plan and zoning ordinances. b. Establish viewshed ordinance requiring 200' bluff setback. c. Establish buffer zone and planting area along Dover Drive. d. Work for appropriate type•of development to be clustered at northwest section of site. Consider "personal care." 2. Develop plan for maximum open space or 60 acres and seek means to implement through: a. General Plan, zonaing, special ordinances; b. Transfer of development rights; c. Combination of bond funds and foundation funds; d.. Possible leaseback arrangement to buy time; e. Possible dedication in conjunction with development agreement for TIC properties; f. Other? III. NEWPORTER NORTH A. Develop maximum and minimum open space plans. 1. Plan for minimum of 50% open space or acres. a. Viewshed.Ordinance requiring 200' bluff setback; b. Buffer zone and planting along Jamboree; c. Work for appropriate type of development to be clustered at northwest end of site leaving full view oceanward from Jamboree; d. Dedication of environmentally sensitive area and archeological area. 2. Develop plan for maximum open space of 100% or acres. a. General Plan, zoning, special ordinances; b. Dedication of sensitive areas; c. Transfer of development rights; d. Possible leaseback arrangement to buy time; e. Combination of bond funds and foundation funds; f. Possible dedication in conjunction with development agreement for TIC properties; g. In -lieu fees; Excise taxes; h. Other? 3. OR work.out plan with Orange County Natural History Museum .� to locate a facility on this site along with open spce. IV. NEWPORT VILLAGE A. Develop a total plan for this site including adequate open space in conjunction iwth library and museum; Bt Consider giving up 2 acres of dedicated open space in return for �� purchase of development rights at Emerald Village by TIC. OPEN SPACE /ACQUISITION March'29, 1989 - • Page 3 V. BAYVIEW LANDING: Preserve upper portion of site as open space in conjunction with development on lower pad. ip VI. VILLA PARK II: Preserve views from PCH through Villa Park II site with ample buffers and widening of bluff setback toward Jamboree. VII. SAN DIEGO CREEK SITES: Preserve buffers, setbacks, and important viewsheds by appropriate zoning and planning. IMPLEMENT ALL FUNDING TECHNIQUES I. In -lieu fees A. Re- calculate as several years have passed; B. Change commercial zoning to residential where approriate. II. Building Excise Tax A. Reflect changes in cast -of- living? B. Systems development charge as in Irvine? III. PRIVATE Open space support A. Establish City sponsored Foundation; B. Develop strong Board of Directors and promotional campaign; C. I WANT TO WORK ON THIS1 We can't lose and are bound to gain something. We could use such a fund for acquisition of smaller neighborhood areas. ,D. Such a Foundation would allow tax breaks for dedication of property so would enhance other acquisition /dedication activities; E. Such a Foundation would allow for individuals and companies to be recognized in perpetuity; F. Such a Foundation would should that our efforts were all- encompassing and enhance the chances of other acquisition techniques. IV. PARK BOND A. A Park Bond, at best, could only hccomplish a small portion of the whole picture. B. What is the most we could ask per family? 1. In 1976 the Bond was for $7M + and would cost the average family of 4 $26.40 per year. 2. Could we win a $10M bond? What would it cost the averagm, family? What could we acquire with it? Funds would have to be allocated to several areas in the City to get broadbased support. C. I think a Park Bond could be sold if it was part of a pachage deal tot where our goals were expressed as a minimum and a maximum and were UW to be achieved by a variety of means. D. A Package should include: 1. 50% achievement of goals through General Plan and zoning; 2. 25% achievement of goals through transfer of development rights, development agreements; 3. 25% achievement of goals through foundation and bond. Item No. 8 DATE: May 31, 1989 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: STATUS OF CAPITAL PROJECTS As we are nearing the end of the fiscal year, all projects are either completed or carried over to be combined with new projects for FY 1989 -90. Next month a report will be provided that shows City Council approved projects and an appropriate time frame for the project. Ronald A. Whitley • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department DATE: May 31, 1989 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director SUBJECT: STATUS OF CAPITAL PROJECTS As we are nearing the end of the fiscal year, all projects are either completed or carried over to be combined with new projects for FY 1989 -90. Next month a report will be provided that shows City Council approved projects and an appropriate time frame for the project. Ronald A. Whitley • n LJ RECREATION DIVISION MAY, 1989 PROGRESS REPORT ial Interest Activities Item No. 11 Spring classes are being completed and registration was very good. Again, gymnastics and Sally Stanton's dance fitness programs will carry the majority of the quarter's revenue. Volleyball produced another sold out session as did children's dance programs. Summer registration began May 26 and the Department is preparing for a prosperous quarter. The Eighth Annual Corona del Mar Scenic Five -K will be June'10 and over 13,000 regis- tration forms have been distributed. As of May 31, the Race is 50% full. The Environmental Nature Center Camp is selling out quickly. This cooperative summer venture with the Nature Center has become a real plus for the Department. Spring Tennis Classes are almost complete and registration was very good. Summer will see the program pick up considerably. Youth Activities /Facilities Maintenance The Newport Heights Memorial Day Picnic was held on May 29 with 1200 participants. The •Recreation staff helped organize and run the games and the Parks staff assisted in set up and clean up. The Newport Beach Summer Surf Slamarama is scheduled for June 3 and 4. Maui and Sons is again sponsoring the surf contest and the Department is expecting more participa- tion due to the creation of a long board division and an open age group division. Speed Soccer is the sport of the month. Approximately 40 children are participating in an indoor version of soccer. A meeting with the Youth Sport Commissioners was held in May. The major discussion item was field use for the upcoming school year. The meeting resulted in Bonita Creek Park being designated as a Junior All American Football facility and Lincoln as a soccer facility. Discussion also concerned the need for major field renovation at several park facilities. A part -time leadership training workshop for playground staff will be held on June 10 at Norwalk's Recreation Park. The workshop is sponsored by CPRS District X. Adult Sports /Aquatics The summer softball season began May 22 with 247 teams which are divided into 34 leagues in men's, women's and coed divisions. After completing spring basketball play with 66 teams, 56 teams registered for summer play which will begin June 5. •There are over 200 teams registered for the Department's first grass volleyball tournament to be held at 'Bonita Creek Park on June 3 and 4. (� Hiring for summer swim staff at Corona del Mar High School and Newport Harbor High School was completed this month. Positions available were lifeguards and swim instructors. Most of last year's staff will be returning making the prospects da for an outstanding program very realistic will begin the week of June 12. • Older Adult Services • In- service training for aquatics staff The one large scale event during May was the Old Fashion Country Picnic. The picnic was in celebration of Older Americans Month and over 250 people enjoyed a fried chicken and apple pie lunch and listened to the barber shop quartet. It was a very successful event that was coordinated by both the staff and volunteers. The Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) honored the volunteers in May with a special awards luncheon in Santa Ana. Many volunteers from Oasis belong to RSVP. Twenty senior walkers and,3 staff members from Oasis participated in the March of Dimes Walk America Walk- A -Thon. The walk was 12 miles and the money raised will benefit research into birth defects. Mary,Allen, Human Services Coordinator, retired from Oasis this month,,however, she will continue to help on special projects. Oasis is in the process of hiring a replacement for her. The shared housing program has blossomed. There are quite a few names of people with homes and even more people are looking to rent a room. It is assumed this is indicative of the increasing cost of living alone. Many seniors are looking for people to assist them in their home in exchange for free rent. PARK AND TREE DIVISION Item No. 12 MAY, 1989 PROGRESS REPORT Our park crews performed the followi'ng tasks in addition to normal maintenance during the month of May. Eastbluff Park 1. Park crews planted (100) 5 gallon Raphiolepsis shrubs, and (150) 1 gallon Star Jasmine shrubs. San Miguel Park 1. Planted ice plant cuttings on bank area just west of the handballi courts. Spyglass Hills Park 1. Park crews delivered and spread new sand in the playground area. Community Youth Center - (Grant Howald Park) 1. Park crews planted (60) 5 gallon dwarf Raphiolepsis shrubs, (10) 5 gallon Heavenly Bamboo shrubs, (15) 5 gallon Sea Shore Junipers, and (40) 1 gallon Agapanthus plants. Jamboree Median from Island Lagoon to Santa Barbara Drive • 1. Park crews finished relocating all of the sprinkler heads in preparation for a one foot wide concrete mowing strip, being installed by contractors. West Jetty View Park 1. Park crews planted (25) 5 gallon dwarf Pittosporum shrubs and (24) 5 gallon Carissas (natal plum). Channel Park 1. Planted several multi - trunked palm trees next to the new restroom building. 2. Installed automated irrigation throughout. 3. Final graded, removing all rocks and debris. 4. Excavated dirt along the park side of the beach so we can import sand there to extend the beach to the new park wall. , Southwest corner of 'Pacific Coast Highway and Balboa Boulevard 1. Assisted the tree crew in planting (4) palm trees. Newport Boulevard Slopes 1. Fertilized all the newly planted trees. • q`� / - 2 - For the Recreation Department, parks crews performed the following: • 1. Replaced basketball nets at Buffalo Hills park and San Joaquin Hills Park. 2. Removed the old light poles from the basketball court at the Community Youth Center. 3. Installed volleyball posts at the following locations; 38th Street, Lugonia Street, and 1224/1228 Oceanfront. 4. At 214/216 East Oceanfront, we replaced one missing volleyball post. 5. Relocated the volleyball court at 3811 Seashore to the 40th Street end. 6. Removed one football goal post from sleeve on the south athletic field at Corona del Mar High School and placed in storage on site. 7. Installed locks and hasps on restroom doors at San Joaquin Hi'lls Park. 8. Bonita Creek Park; removed 2 sets of football goals and transported to storage area. For the Arts Commission Crews moved 25 art boards from Coastline Community Center to Imperial Savings Bank and returned them later. Our Street Tree Division performed the following: • Trimmed 602 trees. Planted 57 trees. Removed 18 trees. Root pruned 124 trees. Completed 35 work requests. Area being trimmed this month: Newport Heights Trees were removed at the following locations: 2417 Bamboo Leaning 1 Podocarpus Superior Ave. Accident 1 Palm Medi -Rex - CDM Dead 1 Palm 1741 Plaza Del Sur Dead 1 Magnolia 1833 Port Charles Dead 1 Pear Oil Fields Re= locate 1 Palm 1707 Port Sheffield Down 1 Pear 1730 Port Margate Owner I Pear 1715 Port Margate Owner 2 Pear 1718 Port Margate Owner 2 Pear 1736 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear 1806 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear 1815 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear 1824 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear 1818 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear • 1853 Port Margate Owner 1 Pear T • LJ - 3 - Trees were planted at the following locations: 1845 Port Westborne 1 Cupania 1212 Sandcastle 1 Cupania 112 Opal 1 Cupania 2101 Santiago 1 Magnolia 114 Opal 1 Cupania 4515 Courtland 1 Ficus Benjamina 1201 Santiago 2 Magnolia 4627 Courtland 1 Pepper 4807 Courtland 2 Ficus Benjamina 4549 Brighton 2 Ficus Benjamina 1730 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1715 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1718 Port Margate. 1 Liquidambar 1736 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1806 Port Margate 2 Liquidambar 1815 Port Margate 2 Liquidambar 1824 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1818 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1853 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 2417 Bamboo 1 Podocarpus Superior Ave. 1 Palm 3278 Ocean 1 Eucalyptus 308 Iris 1 Cupania Community Youth Center 1 Coral Channel Park 4 Palms 1729 Port Margate 1 24" box Liquidambar 1724 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1801 Port Margate 1 24" box Liquidambar 1807 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1841 Port Margate 1 24" box Liquidambar 1848 Port Margate I Liquidambar 1854 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1865 Port Margate 1 24" bdx Liquidambar 1866 Port Margate 1 Liquidambar 1324 Estelle 1 Jacaranda 1906 Santiago 1 Magnolia Channel Park i Palm 2112 Seville 1 Magnolia 2121 E. Ocean 2 Cupania 1231 Essex 1 Bottlebrush 1022 Sandcastle 1 Cupania 1801 Port Carlow 1 Cupania 1827 Port Westborne 1 Cupania Lido Sands 4 Palms 2627 Seaview 1 Pine • q0t - Jacl brooks. Item No. 14. I �I GARY B. LOVELL 1201 DOVE STREET, SUITE 600 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714) 752 -8516 • FROM L.A. (213) 936.2288 TO Mr. Ron Whitley DATE May 4, 1989 P B & R Department SUBJECT City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 9266''0 Meeting Procedures Dear Ron: After sitting through my first PB &R meeting in quite some time, I was favorably impressed by the quality of the commission, the chair, and the staff participation, with but one exception -- the voting method. on any •controversial issue, where there is less than unanimity, I feel that the audience has a right to know how each commissioner votes. This would enable a participating member of the audience to compare comments of a commissioner with his later vote, to know how close he came to passage or failure of his particular issue, and to get a feel for which commissioner he has to convince in his next appearance before them. As a result, I would request that on all such substantive and non - unanimous issues, there either be a roll call vote, show of hands, or use of the electric buttons, with hands or buttons being activated long enough for the audience to identify the votes. Thanks in advance for passing this suggestion on to the chair, vice chair, or other interested parties., Best G r F— W 3.N72 1h. D-11 E 141 onal wishes, hm R1 •t ata �- ..A • p 6 / R Ca Mme,' 9";4 *(-) t3 Madeline Lottes 6601 Seashore Drive / Newport Beach, CA. 92663 �), Iepgq Item No. 15 D N Jc &b. 6c� (4 LAA(-s r 1 A--tcs due 1'� �GJG -2G �3�CIC S�vt r�Jr rc�ZT►o� SEA SO Wc- t-S (4r r� Lc- C60-n c-,O a� ��o2C C(C�cJiA rag C fJ ��" 0( -C-Ar3 Me, a Poc A CAA CICCC-5� ^ wi rVs A CA C9y �L� St'ro2 -'� _ S W/nC2 /w, n i c- 2 _ TAB --e 14-11-c en1y wo G�� �1c ep cn L- 096 ()j'a. Sc- AsA(2IrzC- d'° �5c� �c- �st���� _ r�lEy acsc��oTZ1ce C5 is o�xc -� .jj ch,tc�rlcrJLS) �� yc�unC� MC.,J C�cj C.���C- LGC�. cal► C�. CIlC�11�,5��5 `r 1r2 to �t TIAC SMee )Ik y. (ALL Tk1C- St stcG j do �NC- WC -An M\j& A couq rL2 ShZG -car i r7 r �Ac=. pfd zaC-- �I c �y king �Lc�� cn:C9 CA roc- &4F cosy Ah g � c� FIAC W(�rl E2r� I,�'' r b acc T-6 - �a Ay ccx�rzfi�. m i -�C V cu e r�lc.l` 94A 4 CZG— � - cuwi _ nom_ n CTZ(C n �c- FkAc-"y i k�CllC `yrn. ' y Ate i P nc c�2 �/kc� -� F