Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - 6-14-99June 28, 1999 Agenda Item # CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes D��T Study Session June 14, 1999 - 3:00 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Present: Adams, Glover, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Absent: Thomson (excused) 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Council Member Noyes confirmed with staff that Item #3 (Revised Parking Lot Fees for Balboa Pier and Corona del Mar Parking Lots) has no staff report because it is staffs recommendation to continue the item to July 26, 1999. 2. REVIEW OF 1999 -2000 BUDGET. Mayor O'Neil stated that at the prior City Council meeting, the City Council began review of the Budget Detail and made it through the Fire & Marine Department. He said they would continue with the remaining departments, and then proceed to a review of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). City Manager Bludau confirmed that today's meeting would include a review of the remaining departments, which included Planning & Building, General Services, Community Services and Public Works. He said the review would also include a look at the Internal Services and the CIP. City Manager Bludau stated that a public hearing would be held at the regular meeting later this same day, and that the budget was set for adoption on June 28, 1999. City Manager Bludau stated that today, the departments would highlight any changes in their budgets or anything that might be out of the ordinary from previous years. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Planning Director Temple stated that the department's budget includes an additional Senior Planner position to address the high amount of workload and the priority projects of the City Council. She added that the budget also reflects additional overtime costs to provide for planners to do additional plan checks. She explained that the Building Department has gone to some contract plan checking, so the Planning Department has become the bottleneck in the process. Planning Director Temple stated that the advertising and public relations account (8010) has been doubled. She stated that due to a change in the zoning code, more permits are issued at the staff level. Due to this, it was Volume 52 - Page 502 1999 -2000 Budget (40) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 decided to double the notification requirements. TO -13N7 Planning Director Temple added that the training accounts and equipment maintenance and replacement accounts were also increased. She stated that a new vehicle is being added to the department's fleet. She stated that the 1999/2000 budget also reflects some of the personnel changes made during the previous year. Lastly, Planning Director Temple pointed out the new line item in the Economic Development budget, Special Department Expense NOC (8250), for $140,000. She explained that this is a placeholder for the BID administration contractor that is expected to be hired. Council Member Glover suggested that a line item for $90,000 be added to the Planning Department budget to cover the expense of hiring a person to focus totally on airport issues. She feels that in -house expertise would help greatly in the City's effort to have an airport operating at El Toro. Council Member Glover asked if the City could hire someone on a three -year contract. City Manager Bludau responded that multi -year contracts are in place and it is possible. Council Member Glover feels that the City has been remiss in not having someone available that understands land use issues in the El Toro area. City Manager Bludau stated that this will be added to the Budget Checklist. Mayor O'Neil asked how the budget checklist items will be handled. Administrative Services Director Danner stated that, in the past, the items were straw voted at the second meeting in June. He added that the Budget Checklist currently includes a new position in the Public Works Department, an upgrade to the 800MHz system in the Fire Department and the new item requested by Council Member Glover. Council Member Adams asked about the three carry -over capital improvement projects, which were also to be on the Budget Checklist. Administrative Services Director Danner stated that Public Works Director Webb would cover those during the discussion of the CIP. Council Member Debay asked about the updated housing element, the LCP and the extra personnel that might be needed. Planning Director Temple stated that the housing element would be prepared in- house, and the new Senior Planner would manage the LCP. Council Member Noyes confirmed with Planning Director Temple that the code enforcement personnel are full-time and asked for additional information on the positions. Planning Director Temple stated that the new code enforcement officer would address the specific code enforcement issues on the Balboa Peninsula and increase night and weekend code enforcement. Council Member Noyes confirmed with Planning Director Temple that the citation money received goes into the General Fund. She added that 50% of the cost of the code enforcement officer is paid from CDBG funds, although this is not reflected in the budget. Volume 52 - Page 503 • City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 Council Member Noyes confirmed with Planning Director Temple that the additional money being budgeted to overtime is just to keep up with the normal workload. She explained that the program to expedite permit processing is separate from the new overtime being budgeted. Council Member Noyes asked if the $140,000 mentioned earlier is to be spent for BID administration and matching funds. City Manager Bludau and Administrative Services Director Danner confirmed that the money is for more than just administration. BUILDING DEPARTMENT City Manager Bludau stated that the total proposed budget for the Building Department is $3,749,867. Building Director Elbettar stated that the Building Department budget is 1% less than the prior year's. He stated that construction activity has been on the rise for two years and they've dealt with it in a couple ways - overtime and contract plan check. He stated that total personnel in the department has not been increased, but that some shifting has been done to increase the clerical help. Building Director Elbettar stated that a line item for computer equipment (9010) has been added so that a computer can be placed on the public counter, allowing customers to do their own searches for permit status, plan review and code information. Council Member Noyes complimented the Building Department for the proposal to place a computer on the public counter. And, he confirmed with Building Director Elbettar that the recruitment process is taking place for the vacant Senior Building Inspector position. Council Member Ridgeway asked if money had been budgeted to cover the cost of inputting the information into the computer. Building Director Elbettar stated that it would be handled with the proposed increase in clerical help. He added that the information that will be available at the public computer will include inspection results, plan check status, permit status and property search information. They are hoping to make access to the information very simple and user friendly. Council Member Ridgeway asked about employee computer access. Building Director Elbettar stated that every plan checker has a computer, and that every building inspector has a handheld. Council Member Noyes stated that the handhelds were very effective. He then asked if the information could also be made available on the internet. Building Director Elbettar stated that some key information is currently available, but that they are hoping to add the permit system. Council Member Noyes agreed that it was a good idea. Council Member Debay asked about the one -stop permitting concept and streamlining the process, which she stated were goals when the Planning Volume 52 - Page 504 NU W►. City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX and Building departments were merged. Building Director Elbettar stated that he is always interested in looking for better ways, with the goal to be as user friendly as possible. City Manager Bludau added that flex hours, which allow for weekend inspections, have also helped greatly towards reaching this goal. Council Member Debay added that the City's Building Department has a good reputation. Building Director Elbettar stated that many other enhancements will be coming forth in the future. Building Director Elbettar confirmed for Council Member Ridgeway that the Building Code is currently available on the internet. GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Services Director Niederhaus introduced Mike Pisani, the Deputy Director, and acknowledged his efforts. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the department achieved all of its annual goals for the current fiscal year, and has set ten new ones for the upcoming year. He stated that the department's budget represents 13.9% of the General Fund. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the department is comprised of nine divisions. He stated that the most important change to note is that the department is adding personnel. He stated that one position being added is an Equipment Operator II, which will operate a new vactor • and help in keeping the storm drains clear. The second position being added is a Maintenance Worker II, an apprentice carpenter, to help with many of the small projects at City Hall and throughout the various departments. He added that funding has also been provided to allow five -day a week cleaning at City Hall. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that 3.8% of the department's budget is spent on water, and that the department spends twice as much as any other department on professional/technical assistance. He stated that two new parks will need maintenance in the upcoming budget year also. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that refuse service will begin for 400 new homes in the Ford Loral area in the upcoming year with no additional trucks or personnel being added. He stated that the City is currently recycling 43% of all trash picked up, with the recycling surcharge covering all costs to do so. He stated that the proposed budget includes twice a week trash pickup for parts of the City in the summer, as well as special restroom cleaning at three locations. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the concerns of the department include the small reserve set aside for replacing City vehicles, no money being set aside for possible storm needs and that more money should maybe be set aside for tree trimming. He concluded by stating that the upcoming year looks like a year of stability and that all goals should be met. Council Member Debay asked if reimbursement from FEMA is being • received from last year's storms and what the cost of hauling away the debris was. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that 10,000 tons of debris Volume 52 - Page 505 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 were hauled off the beach as a result of the December 1997 and the February 1998 storms. He stated that the approximate cost was $150,000, and two claims have been filed - one with OES for the December storm and one with FEMA, which is being prepared by the Public Works Department. He added that last Fall he received the final payment for a storm in 1988, indicating how long it takes to receive reimbursement. Council Member Debay stated that she feels that the runoff that ends up on the beach should somehow be handled through the County and not solely by the beach cities. General Services Director Niederhaus confirmed for Council Member Debay that storm cleanup is budgeted under the Field Maintenance Division, primarily in special department expense (8250). He added that the City owes the County dump fees, but the County will let the City wait to pay after reimbursements are received. City Manager Bludau confirmed that the dump fees were included as a part of the reimbursement submittal. General Services Director Niederhaus clarified for Council Member Noyes that the normal trash pickup on the beach, when there is no major storm activity, is 6,000 tons. He stated that the cost to dispose of the trash is $22 per ton, but that other costs associated with the cleanup include the hauling costs, the man -hours and overtime. Council Member Noyes asked what the cost estimates were to maintain the two new parks. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the numbers were back at his office, but that he would provide the information to Council Member Noyes. Council Member Noyes asked about the savings of converting to reclaimed water. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that he understands that the reclaimed water actually costs more and that it is more of an environmental issue than one of saving money. Public Works Director Webb confirmed that reclaimed water is not a money saver but helps to conserve water. Council Member Glover complimented the General Services Department for being able to service the new customers in the Ford Loral area without having to increase personnel. She added that the refuse service workers do a very good job and should be recognized. Council Member Glover stated that the City must keep in mind that although times are good or better right now, the bad times should not be forgotten because they will return. Council Member Glover stated that the City has been able to fund the efforts to support an airport at El Toro without making too many sacrifices. She believes that more money may be needed in the future and, at some point, sacrifices will need to be made. Council Member Debay complimented staff for providing the department organization information in the easy -to -read boxes in the Resource Allocation Plan. Volume 52 - Page 506 10013 X1:1 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX COMMUNITY SERVICES Community Services Director Kienitz provided the City Council with an organizational chart of the department. She stated that the total budget of $6,289,893 is a 1.2% decrease from the previous fiscal year, and she pointed out that the department has a total staff of 50 full-time employees and 41.27 full-time equivalent employees. Community Services Director Kienitz referred to the handout and stated that the department takes direction from three boards and commissions, and has four service units - Arts & Cultural Services, Library Services, Recreational Services and Senior Services. She added that the Recreational Services Division is made up of seven sub units, as listed in the Budget Detail. Community Services Director Kienitz stated that Recreational Services is running one new program, the summer camps out of the Community Youth Center (CYC). She stated that one change in personnel is seen in the Senior Services budget where a secretary position is being added. Community Services Director Kienitz stated that the transportation service operated out of the Oasis Senior Center is only partially funded by the City. And, lastly, she mentioned the new position added in Library Services, a Young Adult Librarian. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Community Services Director Kienitz that the recruitment is underway to fill the vacant Assistant Librarian position. Council Member Glover asked about the $50,000 she heard was being spent for library public relations. Community Services Director Kienitz explained that the Library Board wanted to increase the visibility of the library in the City to attract more City residents to use the central library. She referred to the line item in the budget, Advertising & Public Relations (8010). Council Member Glover stated that this provides another example of money being spent on something that is less important than the El Toro issue. PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Director Webb stated that the department's major functions are providing water and wastewater services to the citizens and administering the capital improvement program. He stated that this past year was the largest capital improvement program the City has ever had. Public Works Director Webb stated the department's operating budget is divided into seven divisions, as listed in the Budget Detail. He stated that the divisions funded by the General Fund are about $16,000 less in 1999- 2000 than the prior year. He added that the Water and Wastewater divisions are funded by enterprise funds. He stated that the overall department budget is 1.46% higher than the previous year. Council Member Debay referred to Item #13, San Joaquin Hills Road Rehabilitation Award of Contract, and made a general comment about the success of the Public Works Department in obtaining grants. Public Works Volume 52 - Page 507 E 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 Director Webb stated that the department is proud to have the Arches Interchange and MacArthur Boulevard projects, both multi -year projects, completed. He continued by clarifying that the construction contract for the San Joaquin Hills Road will cost approximately $1.3 million, with approximately $350,000 of that being funded by the County. INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS City Manager Bludau asked if the City Council had any questions pertaining to the internal services. Council Member Glover asked if the City is reaching its goals in the insurance reserve funds. Administrative Services Director Danner stated that the City anticipates reaching the reserve level in the Insurance Reserve Fund, as directed by Council Policy, in three years. Administrative Services Director Danner added for Council Member Noyes that the total of the reserves is approximately $4.5 million. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Public Works Director Webb stated that the Capital Improvement Program for the 1999 -2000 budget year totals $21.5 million, which includes $5 million being paid for from the General Fund, $1.4 million from park in -lieu and off - street parking fees and $500,000 from CDBG. Public Works Director Webb referred to Council Member Ridgeway's question about the Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction Main to Adams Project, and explained that the CIP is a balanced budget and the money that is available from the General Fund and other sources is being used. He then provided the City Council with a handout, FY 1999 -2000 CIP Budget Checklist Items, which he stated were items that are recommended to be rebudgeted in 1999 -2000. He stated that the update of the General Plan in the airport area will also be added to the checklist. Public Works Director Webb stated that additional items could be added to the checklist but, if done, other projects would probably need to be removed in order to keep the CIP balanced. Council Member Adams pointed out the Jamboree RoadBayview Way Landscape Project listed on the CIP Checklist and stated that Fletcher Jones has agreed to match funds up to $30,000. He requested that the City's amount be increased from $19,990.25 to $35,000 which, when added to Fletcher Jones' $30,000 contribution, would provide for a $60,000 project and a $5,000 contingency fund. Public Works Director Webb stated that he could continue the review of the CIP by going through each fund and explain projects, or he could answer specific questions. Council Member Glover asked for more information on the City Hall 2na Floor Office Space Remodel Design. Public Works Director Webb stated that staff wanted to look at the possibility of a facility that is above the Revenue Volume 52 - Page 508 1"41 Z City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX Division. He stated that this would be a feasibility study only in the 1999- 2000 fiscal year. Council Member Glover asked if 3,000 ficus trees would be removed in 1999- 2000 as a part of the Street Tree Reforestation project. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the 3,000 trees that are causing hardscape damage were mentioned in the project report just to provide information, but that only 200 would be removed during the upcoming fiscal year. Council Member Glover asked about an instrument used by the General Services Department to determine when a tree will die. General Services Director Niederhaus explained that it is a boring device that measures friction and voids in a tree. He said it has been proven to be 100% reliable. Council Member Glover stated that her experience has not seen the device as being so reliable, but that it might not have been the device that the City currently owns. Council Member Glover asked if the Urban Forest Inventory would include the worth of the trees. General Services Director Niederhaus explained that the value of the tree is included in the inventory but, when asked if that economic worth is received when a tree is cut down, he stated that it is requested but most often not received. Council Member Glover asked how this money could be collected more often and General Services Director Niederhaus stated that the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission has recommended a larger fine for illegal removal of trees. Council Member Glover stated that she would be in support of such a fine, since destroying City property deserves full recovery. City Manager Bludau suggested that the City Attorney should be involved with the drafting of such an ordinance. Council Member Noyes confirmed with General Services Director Niederhaus that the Urban Forest Inventory project scheduled for 1999 -2000 would complete the City's five -year inventory. Council Member Glover confirmed with Public Works Director Webb that the Gas Remediation Program is citywide, and includes Coast Highway and Hoag Hospital area, and the Fun Zone area. Council Member Glover asked how the park in -lieu fees work for the Bonita Canyon Park Development_ Public Works Director Webb stated that the text in the CIP for this item has not been updated, that the project will come before the City Council to approve and that the in -lieu fees, at this point, are only a potential source of revenue to fund the park. Referring to the Pavement Management Program Major Maintenance project, Public Works Director Webb defined "asphalt concrete" as the black streets. Council Member Glover further asked if the City was planning to asphalt all concrete streets. Public Works Director Webb confirmed this, and explained that it costs four to five times as much to remove and replace a concrete street as an asphalt concrete one. He stated that one exception would be the ocean front street ends, which are done in concrete. Council Member Glover asked about the price comparison and the longevity of the two. Public Works Director Webb stated that typical new asphalt Volume 52 - Page 509 11 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 pavement in a residential area costs between $2 and $2.50 per square foot, while concrete pavement would cost $7 to $8 per square foot. He stated that asphalt requires a slurry program every five to six years, an overlay every 15 to 20 years and reconstruction at 40 years. He said that concrete streets, as long as they are not cut for utility trenches, etc., can last 60 to 100 years. Council Member Glover stated that concrete streets make for a calmer and cooler neighborhood, and provide for better air quality. Public Works Director Webb confirmed for Council Member Glover that the Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard Intersection Improvements are not related to the recently completed MacArthur Boulevard widening project. Council Member Glover requested that the City Manager provide a report on the per capita figures for library use, as related to the Newport Coast Library project. Referring to Council Member Glover's question about the Big Canyon Reservoir Cover project, Public Works Director Webb stated that the City owns the reservoir and that, due to various water quality regulations, it has become a necessity to cover open reservoirs. Council Member Debay referred to the money that is collected by the City from ocean front encroachment permits, which Public Works Director Webb confirmed to be slightly over $100,000 per year. Council Member Debay stated that the street ends need to be better done, and she thought they could do fewer than the four to five that are currently being done per year and improve the existing street ends with the remaining money. Public Works Director Webb stated that part of the funding does include going back and improving the appearance of the existing street ends. Council Member Debay asked if the trigger signal at San Miguel and Yacht Coquette would be included in the upcoming budget. Public Works Director Webb stated that the priority signal list includes twenty locations, with the San Miguel/Yacht Coquette location being number twelve on the list. He added that the priority signal list will be provided to the City Council in July, and they will be asked to set the priority of which signals should be done with the $300,000 available in the budget. He stated that it may be decided to construct one signal and upgrade controllers for others, or construct two new signals. Council Member Debay stated that she thought there was funding available from the County for library construction and operation. City Manager Bludau stated that it's 1.7% of the 100°A of the property tax, and does not include the Newport Coast area. Council Member Adams asked about the schedule for rehabilitation of Jamboree Road, north of Coast Highway. Public Works Director Webb stated that it will be before the City Council at their next meeting for award of the contract, with the money coming from the current year's budget. Council Member Ridgeway referred to the Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction - Main to Adams. He stated that he thought the project was originally planned to cover Main to Medina. Public Works Director Webb said that he Volume 52 - Page 510 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX was correct, but that all the needed projects that are listed in the five -year CIP projections aren't always funded. He stated that staff did not feel there would be enough money in the upcoming budget to go all the way to Medina Way. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he felt that it would be economically efficient to do the entire length at the same time. Public Works Director Webb stated that there wouldn't be that much efficiency to scale with this particular project. Council Member Ridgeway questioned why the full length was being estimated at a cost much higher than what was listed in last year's CIP for the same project. Public Works Director Webb explained that staffs ability to estimate the cost of a project is based on how much information is available, and that not much information is available for this area. He added that the design for the full length would be done and possibly the estimates would show that the entire project should be done at the same time. Council Member Ridgeway requested that the text for this project be corrected in the CIP to indicate that the design of the project would be for the full length. Council Member Ridgeway referred to the Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction and Drainage Improvements, 1201 Street/Medina Way. He asked if the project's design phase could happen in the upcoming fiscal year, rather than the following year's. Public Works Director Webb stated that staff did not feel that the project could be funded in the upcoming budget year. And, he stated that until the design phase is completed, he won't know how extensive of a rehabilitation it will be. After a general discussion regarding concrete and asphalt and getting to all the projects in the City that need to be done, Public Works Director Webb stated that he would like to come up with a program that will not require total removal and replacement of Balboa Boulevard. Council Member Ridgeway referred to the Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction and Drainage Improvements, 2181 to 16th Streets. He asked how he could get this project up to a higher level of priority, and asked about the possibility of bonding. Public Works Director Webb stated that bonding would have to be approved by a vote of the citizens. Council Member Ridgeway stated his frustration with some high priority projects in his district that continue to be pushed back. Council Member Adams stated that the Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction - Main to Adams project should be allocating money to finish the project in the 2000 -2001 fiscal year. City Manager Bludau stated that the project was only being shown in the 1999 -2000 fiscal year to match the title, but that staff could change the title to Adams to Medina stretch, and show it being budgeted over a two -year period. Council Member Noyes asked if the Bayside Drive Beautification (Phase II) wasn't already in the current year's budget. Public Works Director Webb stated that the current year's budget included the intersection and that Phase II was to continue on up Bayside. He stated that bids were obtained for the intersection which were much higher than staffs estimates and some of the money budgeted in 1999 -2000 may need to go towards that completion. Public Works Director Webb explained for Council Member Noyes that the Volume 52 - Page 511 0 0 Ll City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 Assessment District Program sets aside funds that are anticipated as being needed by the assessment districts. Public Works Director Webb explained that the Planning Department is preparing the final report for the Parking Management Implementation project, and that money is being set aside in anticipation of costs in the upcoming year. Council Member Noyes asked if $22,000 was enough to budget towards the Pier/Float Maintenance Program given the money that is received from the marina. Public Works Director Webb stated that the project was for the piers and floats around the bay, and has nothing to do with the yacht basin. Council Member Noyes asked if the Newport Harbor Maintenance Dredging project was dealing with one specific permit. Public Works Director Webb stated that this project deals with the master permit that the City has to obtain every ten years. Council Member Noyes stated that he'd like to see money set aside for future dredging needs in specific areas. He requested that this be added to the Budget Checklist. Council Member Noyes asked for a brief explanation of the Oil Field Improvement Program. Public Works Director Webb stated that the production from the wells has been steadily declining and it has been recommended that production can be increased by recompleting the wells, or making sure that the slots in the casings are open. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the issue is whether the City should be in the oil business. He stated that he is in support of taking advantage of the revenue that is produced. Council Member Noyes asked for information on what work has been done on the Fire Department Office Centralization project. Fire & Marine Chief Riley explained that the 1999 -2000 allocation allows the completion of what has been started. He stated that the money shown in 2000 -2001 has been listed in the CIP in error and should be removed. Fire & Marine Chief Riley explained for Council Member Noyes that the Fire Station Modification and Upgrades project includes much more than is listed in the CIP. Public Works Director Webb stated that the project description would be revised to better reflect the entire project's scope. Council Member Noyes asked what the money being budgeted in 2000 -2001 for the Central Library Improvements project would be used for. Community Services Director Kienitz explained that the money is being set aside as a placeholder in case the land behind the Central Library becomes available. Council Member Noyes asked what the money being budgeted in 2000 -2001 for the Water Transmission Main Master Plan Improvements project would be used for. Public Works Director Webb stated that the master plan includes a large project to reinforce the water systems in the Corona del Mar area. He stated that this will improve some existing water pressure problems. Volume 52 - Page 512 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX Volume 52 - Page 513 Council Member Noyes asked, in general, how the second -year projections in the CIP relate to the overall budget. Administrative Services Director Danner stated that in some cases a decision is made to fund a project over several years and in other cases, it's a wish list with no determined funding source. Council Member Noyes asked if the Big Canyon Reservoir Disinfection Modifications would happen if the reservoir was covered or if it was to be left uncovered. He also referred to the Pump Station Improvement at Big Canyon Reservoir project. Public Works Director Webb stated that if the reservoir is covered, the disinfection process changes. He added that money has been set aside in anticipation of the reservoir eventually being covered. Council Member Glover asked about the comparison of spending $23 million to bring groundwater from Fountain Valley and the $6 million to cover the reservoir, change the disinfection process and upgrade the pump, and the necessity level. Public Works Director Webb stated that the cover and disinfection are necessary due to water quality regulations that require new standards. He stated that the pump station work is necessary to reconstruct a 30 -year old facility to current day standards. Council Member Glover asked if there was any funding for either of the projects. Public Works Director Webb stated that Council Member Debay and Utilities Manager Davidson traveled to Washington, D.C. to apply for funding from several sources. He believes the City is still under consideration. Council Member Glover stated her understanding that meeting new regulations usually qualifies for reimbursement. City Manager Bludau confirmed with Public Works Director Webb that it is not an EPA mandate to cover the reservoir. Council Member Glover requested that funding options continue to be pursued. Council Member Noyes asked for an explanation of the money being budgeted for the Newport Boulevard/Balboa Boulevard Merger. Public Works Director Webb stated that the study has not been completed, but will come before the City Council for a final decision. Council Member Adams suggested that Coast Highway not be torn up as a part of the Water Transmission Main Master Plan Improvements project. Council Member Glover stated that her opinion regarding the oil wells is that although revenue is received, expenses also exist. She feels the wells should be left dormant. Council Member Glover requested that the City's lobbyist in Sacramento attempt to force Southern California Edison to handle undergrounding districts in a more timely manner. Mayor O'Neil confirmed with Public Works Director Webb that the slope stabilization project on the Fernleaf ramp would be started in September. Council Member Noyes Council agreed with Member Glover's previous comment about how slowly approved undergrounding districts become Volume 52 - Page 513 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 reality and that something should be done to speed up the process. Mayor O'Neil stated that the City Council did approve money to be spent on an undergrounding assessment district staff member. Council Member Noyes stated that other cities are having the same problems and maybe Newport Beach could take the lead. Council Member Debay asked why the PMP Hospital Road Reconstruction, Placentia Avenue/Newport Boulevard project does not have money budgeted in it until 2001 -2002 when it was determined to be a priority in the City's Pavement Management Program. Public Works Director Webb explained that several projects make up the Pavement Management Program and many will be done in the first two years. It was discussed that the patching of a particular pothole hasn't worked. Council Member Ridgeway asked, if the funds were available, how much it would cost the City to do all of its current road projects. Public Works Director Webb stated that the total cost of the Pavement Management Plan is approximately $38 million, with about $6 to $7 million being spent in the upcoming budget year. Carol Boice, 2945 Catalpa, asked if the Jamboree Road/Bayview Way Landscape project was only subject to Fletcher Jones' donation. Council Member Adams responded by stating that the commitment from Fletcher Jones is a verbal commitment only and if it did not happen, the City would still do the project but with less money. Ms. Boice asked if the project was still to mitigate the light and glare, and what the timetable was. Council Member Adams stated that he feels that the plan being negotiated will be acceptable to all parties. Val Skoro, 1601 Bayadere Terrace, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commissioner, stated that he was before the City Council to request that $18,000 be allocated to the parking lot across the street from the Oasis Senior Center. He said the parking lot is currently unlit and many of the senior trips return back to the lot after dark. He stated that various options have been discussed and the effort would be coordinated with the nearby residents. He stated that it is a safety hazard that needs to be addressed. Council Member Ridgeway asked for a clarification of the location of the parking lot. Mayor O'Neil explained that the lot is on the left -hand side of Marguerite, as one travels north. Scott Paulsen, 1922 Port Provence Place, acknowledged the people in the audience who were in attendance to support a budget line item for lights in the parking lot. Mr. Paulsen stated that the Senior Services Manager has requested this project for several years. He said there are approximately six trips a month out of the Oasis Senior Center, and that the issue is serious. He stated that their proposal would not be intrusive into neighbors' homes and would operate on a key card system so that the lights would only be used when needed. Mayor O'Neil requested that this item be placed on the Budget Checklist for Volume 52 - Page 514 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 the suggested $18,000. City Manager Bludau stated that this could be developed as a CIP project. Per Mayor O'Neil's concerns, he stated that staff would also notice the residents. Upon his suggestion, Council Member Ridgeway was told that the trips could not return during daylight hours only. Tom Hyans, President of the Central Newport Beach Community Association, complimented the Police Department, their leadership and the Citizens Police Academy. He then provided the City Council with a summary of the CIP, as prepared by the Central Newport Beach Community Association. He went through the list, which noted changes to cost or timing of projects. Council Member Adams clarified with Mr. Hyans that the black -typed information on the handout is what is in the budget. Mr. Hyans continued through the list, detailing out some of the association's priorities. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT — 5:35 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on June 9, 1999, at 3:30 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 52 - Page 515 INDEX 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes DRAFT Regular Meeting June 14, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX - 3:00 p.m. [Refer to separate CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Adams, Glover, Debay, Ridgeway, Noyes, Mayor O'Neil Absent: Thomson (excused) Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member Noyes. Invocation by Mrs. Marianne Scott, First Church of Christ Scientist. Presentation to Paul Salata regarding "Irrelevant Week ". MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- • Council Member Adams requested that the Jamboree/Bison intersection issue be agendized for the July 26 City Council meeting. • Council Member Glover announced that the Aviation Committee will hold a forum at the Central Library on the status of El Toro Airport planning on June 21 at 7 pan. • Council Member Noyes thanked Council and the City Manager for participating in the Balboa Parade last weekend. He also thanked Assemblywoman Marilyn Brewer and Congressman Dana Rohrabacher for their participation. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTESIORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR (STUDY SESSION) AND REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 24, 1999. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. 2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by title only. Volume 62 - Page 516 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION S. REVISED PARKING LOT FEES FOR BALBOA PIER AND CORONA No report DEL MAR PARKING LOTS (contd. from 4/26/99 & 6/10/99). Continue to July 26, 1999. 4. Removed at the request of Council Member Adams. 6. RECYCLING SURCHARGE. Adopt Resolution No. 99 -39 authorizing the Res 99 -39 recycling surcharge to be set at $2.17 per month per residential unit effective Recycling Surcharge July 1, 1999. (40/44) 6. ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ORANGE COUNTY Res 99 -40 NON - EXCLUSIVE SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND Solid Waste TERMINATION OF NON - EXCLUSIVE SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE Franchise AGREEMENT WITH WESTERN WASTE. Adopt Resolution No. 99 -40 Agreement terminating the commercial solid waste franchise agreement between the (42) City and Western Waste and assigning the City's franchise agreement with Waste Management of Orange County, Inc. to Waste Management of Orange County, a Division of Waste Management Collection and Recycling, Inc; and approve agreement to terminate the solid waste collection franchise agreement between the City and Western Waste, and to assign the Waste Management of Orange County Franchise to Waste Management of Orange County, a Division of Waste Management Collection and Recycling, Inc. 7. MEASURE M ELIGIBILITY REQUALIFICATION FOR FY 1998 -99. Res 99 -41 Adopt the Seven -Year Capital Improvement Program; adopt Resolution Measure M No. 99 -41 pertaining to the status of the City s Circulation Element and Eligibility/ affirming that there has been no unilateral reduction in lanes on any Master Orange County Plan of Arterial Highways during FY 1998 -99; and direct staff to submit the Transportation adopted Capital Improvement Program, and the Maintenance of Effort Authority certification to the Orange County Transportation Authority to satisfy the (74) eligibility provisions for the Measure M and the Congestion Management Programs. 8. Removed at the request request of Council Member Noyes. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 9. MULTI -YEAR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH C -2932 POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (PMA). Approve the subject Police Management MOU. MOU (38) 10. MULTI -YEAR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH C- 2060/Firefighters FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION (NBFA). Approve the subject MOU. MOU (38) 11. AGREEMENT WITH WESTNET. Approve the Automate Rescue Series C -3291 Sponsorship agreement with Westnet to provide enhanced communications Rescue Series equipment for two lifeguard rescue vessels. Sponsorship (38) 12. MACARTHUR BOULEVARD PAVEMENT REHABILITATION AND C -3269 SANDCASTLE/ TILLERBLUE KEY PAVEMENT OVERLAY (C -3269) — Pavement Volume 52 - Page 517 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 ill M Volume 52 - Page 518 AWARD OF CONTRACT. Approve the plans and specifications; award Rehabilitation C -3269 to All American Asphalt for the total bid price of $894,521 and & Pavement authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; and Overlay establish an amount of $89,000 to cover the cost of materials testing and (38) unforeseen work. 13. Removed at the request of Council Member Debay. 14. Removed at the request of a member of the audience. 15. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND EP 99 -211 MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE Encroachment/ NORTH BAY FRONT AND ONYX AVENUE PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF- North Bay Front & WAY, ADJACENT TO 1301 AND 1301'' /m NORTH BAY FRONT, Onyx Avenue BALBOA ISLAND (EP 99 -211). Approve the application subject to (65) 1) execution of an Encroachment Agreement for non - standard improvements; and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement and authorize and direct the City Clerk to have the agreement recorded with the Orange County Recorder; 2) an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department; and 3) a Building Permit issued by the Building Department. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 16. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR JUNE 10, 1999. Receive and Planning Commission file. (68) 17. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -073) TO APPROPRIATE A CHECK IN BA -073 THE AMOUNT OF $2,079 FROM THE STATE LIBRARY S PUBLIC State Library/ LIBRARY STAFF EDUCATION PROGRAM FOR TUITION Tuition Reimbursement REIMBURSEMENT. Approve BA -073. (50/40) 18. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -075) TO INCREASE REVENUE BA -075 ESTIMATES AND EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS BY $2,661.37 Police/ FOR THE PURCHASE OF A TRAINING MANAGEMENT COMPUTER Training Management SYSTEM TO BE REIMBURSED BY THE CALIFORNIA COMMISSION Computer System ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING (POST). Approve (70/40) BA -075. 19. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -076) TO APPROPRIATE A CHECK IN BA -076 THE AMOUNT OF $1,395 FROM THE NATIONAL JUNIOR Basketball Scoreboard BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION TO PURCHASE SCOREBOARD (62/40) CONTROLLERS. Approve BA -076. 20. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -077) TO TRANSFER $1,308 FROM THE BA -077 BONITA CANYON APARTMENT OVERTIME ACCOUNT 010 -22366 Building Department TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OVERTIME ACCOUNT 2900- Overtime 7040. Approve BA -077. (26/40) 21. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -078) TO APPROPRIATE A CHECK IN BA -078 THE AMOUNT OF $11,428.30 FROM A.Y.S.O. REGION 57 FOR FIELD Lincoln Elementary IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE AT LINCOLN Field Improvements Volume 52 - Page 518 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX (62140) ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Approve BA -078. 22. Removed at the request of a member of the audience. 23. APPOINTMENT OF CITY MANAGER AS VOTING MEMBER OF Metro Cities Fire METRO CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY BOARD. Approve appointment. Authority Board (61) 24. NOMINATION TO FILL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Economic (EDC) VACANCY. Appoint Barbara Wold to fill the Community Based Development Marketing vacancy on the EDC. Committee (24) 25. Removed at the request of Council Member Adams. 532. RESIGNATION OF ROYA FOULADI FROM THE ARTS Arts Commission COMMISSION. a) Accept the resignation of Roya Fouladi, Arts (24) Commissioner, effective immediately (term expires June 30, 2001); b) waive noticing and appointment requirements pertaining to unscheduled vacancies as outlined in City Council Policy A -2; c) increase the number of vacancies to be filled on June 28, 1999 by one member; and d) direct the City Clerk to incorporate the appointment of this vacancy with the appointments to be made on June 28, 1999 to fill the scheduled vacancies (terms which expire on June 30, 2003). Motion by Council Member Debav to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed and/or continued (4, 8, 13, 14, 22, and 25). Without the by objection, motion carried acclamation. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 4. CITY S SUPPORT OF THE "FAIR COMPETITION AND TAXPAYER Res 99 -38 SAVINGS ACT ". ACA 16 & AB 1448 Fair Competition/Tax Council Member Adams stated that he is delighted that Council is (48) considering formally supporting the "Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" and read portions of Resolution No. 99 -38. Motion by Council Member Adams to adopt Resolution No. 99 -38 stating the City's support of the "Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" and its legislative vehicles (ACA 16 and AB 1448). Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 8. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 99-42 REDUCING THE NUMBER OF Res 99.42 MEMBERS ON THE ARTS COMMISSION FROM NINE TO SEVEN Commissions EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1999 AND CONFIRM THE NOMINEES FOR & Boards Nominees/ BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES. Arts Commission Membership (24) Regarding the resolution that reduces the number of members on the Arts Commission, Council Member Glover reported that this is the only committee with nine members. She indicated that the Ad -Hoc Appointments Committee felt that seven members could make just as good decisions as Volume 52 - Page 519 YI City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 nine members, and that this brings the committee back in line with the other City committees. City Manager Bludau stated that staff did hear from Commissioners who were on the Arts Commission when it changed from seven to nine members and some of them expressed the feeling that it was more difficult to reach a consensus with the larger membership. Motion bv-Council Member Noyes to reopen nominations. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. Motion by Council Member Noyes to add Patricia Beek to the list of nominees for the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. Motion by Council Member Debay to add Richard Fuller to the list of nominees for the Planning Commission. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. Motion by Council Member Noyes to adopt Resolution No. 99.42. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. Council confirmed the following nominations; and scheduled appointments for June 28, 1999: Board of Library Trustees (2 Vacancies — Bartolic and Ryan) Nominees: Patrick Bartolic. Julie Rvan, and Mary Petrovoulos. City Arts Commission (2 Vacancies — Valentine, Michaels, Fouladi & vacant seat)* Nominees: Karen Raab. Lila Crespin, Don Greeory, Tom Staple, and Catherine Michaels. * (2 vacancies as a result of the adoption of Resolution No. 99.42 and resignation of Roya Fouladi — Item S32) Civil Service Board - (1 Vacancy - Godfrey) Nominees: James Dunlap. Jr. and Douglas Wood. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission (2 Vacancies — Beek and Glasgow) Nominees: Timothy Brown, Stuart Macfarland. Jules Marine. Curtis Herberts, and Patricia Beek. Planning Commission (2 Vacancies — Gifford and Fuller) Nominees: Robert Patterson, Christi Bettinyen, Steven Kiser, Anne Gifford. and Richard Fuller. Volume 52 - Page 520 il5T City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 13. SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD REHABILITATION AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3170). Noting that there are seven recommendations with this report, Council Member Debay pointed out that four of the contracts are being funded or supplemented by a competition that the City entered, along with all Orange County cities, in order to receive the Gas Tax Funds that OCTA administers, Federal Highway Funds, and State funds. She commended Public Works Director Webb and his department for doing this and emphasized that this, in effect, brings the tax dollars back to the City to benefit the residents. Motion by Council Member Debay to a) approve the plans and specifications for San Joaquin Hills Road from Jamboree Road to MacArthur Boulevard (Federal Authorization No. STPLMA- 5151 - (008)) and for San Joaquin Hills Road from MacArthur Boulevard to Marguerite Avenue (Federal Authorization No. STPLMA- 5151 - (009)); b) award contract (C -3170) to R.J. Noble Company for the total bid price of $1,297,459 ($866,924 for STPL2,IA- 5151 -(008) and $430,535 for STPLMA- 5151 - (009)), and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; c) establish an amount of $129,000 ($86,000 for STPLMA- 5151 -(008) and $43,000 for STPLMA -5151- (009)) to cover the cost of material testing and unforeseen work; d) authorize a budget amendment (BA -074) to appropriate $258,368 of Federal Highway AHRP Funds (STPLMA05151- (008)) in a newly established account 7285 - 05100396; e) authorize a budget amendment (BA -074) to appropriate $190,955 of Federal Highway AHRP Funds (STPLMA05151- (009)) in a newly established account 7285- C5100494; f) establish Gas Tax Account No. 7181 - 05100494 for STPLMA- 5151 - (009); and g) authorize a budget amendment (BA -074) to transfer $282,580 from Gas Tax Account No. 7181- C5100396 into Account No. 7181- C5100494. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 14. NEWPORT THEATRE ARTS CENTER ADDITION — AWARD OF CONTRACT (C- 3225). Dr. Jan Vandersloot, 2221 East 16th Street, member of SPON, stated that this is to remove six mature eucalyptus trees at Ensign View Park due to the Newport Theater Arts Center remodeling. He provided Council with pictures of the eucalyptus trees and believed that the alternative would be to only remodel the Theater internally. He noted that the trees are beautiful, mature, healthy eucalyptus trees that seem to be on the City's "endangered list", noting that Item 22 also deals with the removal of eucalyptus trees. Dr. Vandersloot believed that a remodel that could have preserved the trees would have been considered if this was appropriately regarded a year ago when the design was first considered. He expressed the opinion that planting other trees on Riverside Avenue does not justify the removal of these trees since Riverside Avenue has nothing to do with Ensign View Park. Public Works Director Webb stated that the tree removals were at the request of the Arts Center. He indicated that they are working within a confined area and needed to have better access into the dressing rooms and also needed to push the wall out. He stated that six eucalyptus trees will be Volume 52 - Page 521 �w C- 3170BA -074 San Joaquin Hills Road Rehabilitation (38140) C -3225 Newport Theatre Arts Center (38) 0 0 0 u City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 removed at the Arts Center but six king palms will be planted along Riverside Avenue as part of the beautification program. Council Member Glover took issue with Dr. Vanderslooes statement relative to reviewing the designs a year ago, noting that she, Dr. Vandersloot, and another member of the public met with the architect at that time. Margaret Mary Butt, P.O. Box 522, Corona del Mar, stated that ficus trees are also being cut down in Corona del Mar and that it looks awful because now the streets signs are exposed. She agreed that the eucalyptus trees should not be removed because of their beauty. Christine Karan stated that she and her neighbors hope there is another way to handle the situation and indicated that they are willing to try to raise money if it costs more to do something else. In response to Council Member Noyes' question, Mr. Webb believed there were at least 20 -25 more eucalyptus trees at that location. Motion by Council Member Rid eway to approve the plans and specifications; award contract (C -3225) to L.T.G. Construction Co, for the total bid amount of $118,800 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract; establish an amount of $6,500 to cover the cost of unforeseen work; and approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Brion S. Jeannette & Associates, Inc. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 22. REFORESTATION FUNDING. Dr. Jan Vandersloot, 2221 East 161h Street, member of SPON, showed Council photographs that he believed illustrate that the trees are not decaying or dying. He stated that the General Service Director is requesting Council approval based on a boring tool test which only measures density. He requested that Council allow the public to have an independent arborist evaluate the health of the trees prior to their removal and the City spending the money. Dr. Vandersloot added that these trees may not pose any health or safety problems and that they may be perfectly healthy trees. He suggested delaying the award of this until after the public hearing with the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, noting that the surrounding residents do not know of the pending removal of the 14 eucalyptus trees. Council Member Debay stated that the boring test identified large, rotten internal areas that could fail at any time. Dr. Vandersloot disagreed, stating that an independent arborist needs to look at that since the boring test only shows that the trees are old; that the boring tool does not tell what disease a tree has; and that the boring tool just measures density. Council Member Debay expressed concern that houses could be damaged by these trees falling during a windstorm. Volume 52 - Page 522 INDEX BA -079 Reforestation (62140) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX General Services Director Niederhaus explained that a private appraisal of these trees was conducted two years ago using a boring tool. He indicated that these trees are 60 years old, are advanced for their species, and have been tested twice. He added that the arborist wrote strong letters two years ago for the City to watch these trees very closely for internal failure. He emphasized that not all the trees are being removed, just those that have not passed the internal test. Mr. Niederhaus stated that he was called out on a tree failure during the El Nino storms and indicated that there is absolutely no place for these 65 -75 foot tall trees to fall. He pointed out that it is his responsibility to keep trees in a safe condition throughout the City and that he feels strongly about these trees needing to be removed to protect and provide for the safety of the residents. Council Member Ridgeway stated that this is a calm time of year and that he would support continuing this for no more than four weeks if Dr. Vandersloot wanted to have the trees retested by a credible arborist, believing that the arborist will find exactly what the City has concluded about the trees. Regarding the Marine Avenue trees, Council Member Noyes stated that there were two instances in which the residents requested that the General Services Department look at these trees because they were concerned about their condition and since they were visibly damaged. Council Member Adams stated that he would be supportive of postponing the tree removal to have the trees retested and to review the report since it is a calm time of year. Mr. Niederhaus strongly recommended that the trees be removed and invited Dr. Vandersloot to view the conditions of the removed trees. Further, he would be happy to test the trees again and share the report with Dr. Vandersloot. In response to Mayor O'Neil's question, Mr. Niederhaus indicated that the trees are scheduled for removal within the next two weeks. Mayor O'Neil stated that the timeframe still provides Dr. Vandersloot an opportunity for independent examination and to meet with Mr. Niederhaus. Further, if the trees are not diseased when they are removed, the General Services Department will cease removing any more trees. Motion by Mayor O'Neil to approve a Budget Amendment (BA -079) for $13,000 to provide additional funding for emergency reforestation operations (removal and replacement of decayed trees on 4th and Marine Avenues). Elaine Linhoff, 1760 E. Ocean Boulevard, stated that it is difficult for her to believe that there are 20 trees in such an emergency state that warrants immediate removal and noted that Policy G -1 indicates that these matters first go before the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. With Council Member Glover and Council Member Ridgeway dissenting, the motion carried. Volume 52 - Page 523 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 25. TREE REMOVAL APPEAL — 2327 ARBUTUS AVENUE (contd. from 4/12199). Continue to 6128199. Council Member Adams stated that he received a call from the applicant, Mr. Parker, and asked why this is being continued to the June 28 Council meeting. General Services Director Niederhaus indicated that this item is being continued so that it coincides with the review of Policy G -1. Further, Mr. Parker will be in attendance at the 6/28/99 meeting. — None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 26. ADOPTION OF THE 1998 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. Philip Bettencourt, 9 Executive Circle, Irvine, representing the Building Industry Association, stated that the Building Industry Association (BIA) made a concerted effort this year throughout Orange County cities to try to get as much protection for the uniformity of codes as possible. Knowing that there are unique, local circumstances permitted under law that allow cities to make some exceptions to the code, he believed that the City's exceptions have been done legitimately because of the City's hillside terrain and the harbor conditions that limit ordinary street grid access. He stated that BIA supports the package that is before Council this evening. There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Glover to adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 99 -13 Amending Title 9 of the NBMC to adopt the 1998 California Fire Code, and local amendments to take effect concurrently with the State Code on July 1, 1999. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 27. ADOPTION OF THE BUILDING CODES AND RESOLUTION NO. 99-43 SETTING FORTH FINDINGS BASED ON LOCAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH WHICH MAKE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE AND THE CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE REASONABLY NECESSARY. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. Philip Bettencourt, 9 Executive Circle, Irvine, representing the Building Industry Association, stated that the Building Industry Association (BIA) salutes the City's building official for being a part of the consensus group which emerged from a select group of local building officials to pool and Volume 52 - Page 524 110111 No report Ord 99 -13 Fire Code (41/53) Ord 99 -14 Res 99 -43 Building Code (26/53) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 evaluate local changes in the interest of trimming down the number of amendments in the over 400 cities and counties in California. He stated that BIA endorses this package and believes that the conditions are limited and within the scope of findings required by State law. Richard Luehrs, Building Code Board of Appeals Chairman, stated that the Building Code Board of Appeals reviewed this and unanimously recommends that Council adopt this package. There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Debav to adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 99 -14 amending Title 15 of the NBMC to adopt the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Administrative Code, the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Housing Code, the 1998 Edition of the California Building Code, the 1998 Edition of the California Mechanical Code, the 1998 Edition of the Electrical Code, the 1998 Edition of the California Plumbing Code, the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, and the Excavation and Grading Code; and adopt Resolution No. 99 -43 setting forth findings of necessity. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 28. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR THE 1999 -00 FISCAL YEAR, PURSUANT TO SECTION 1102 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY CHARTER, AND THE CITY'S APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMIT FOR THE 1999 -00 FISCAL YEAR, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XHIB OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. There being no testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Rideewax to adopt Resolution No. 99.44 determining and establishing an appropriations limit for fiscal year 1999 -00 in accordance with Article XHIB of the California Constitution and Government Code Section 7910. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 29. ALBERTSON'S INC. (MARK STEINMAN, APPLICANT), 5049 EAST COAST HIGHWAY — AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH APPROVED A REQUEST FOR A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A REMODEL AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE MEZZANINE WITHIN AN EXISTING RETAIL GROCERY STORE BUILDING AND A WAIVER OF OFF - STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT WITH THE ACCEPTANCE OF AN OFF -SITE PARKING AGREEMENT. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. Volume 52 - Page 525 INDEX Res 99 -44 1999/2000 Budget (40) Use Permit 3650 Planning Commission Appeal/ Albertson's, Inc. (88) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 l Planning Director Temple reported that the Planning Commission considered this item on May 6 and that many concerns regarding the parking situation and traffic circulation around the shopping center were expressed by the surrounding neighbors. In order to address the neighbors' concerns, the Planning Commission added conditions to those recommended by staff that requires the store owner to purchase City parking permits for their employees so that they could park in the City lot on Bayside Drive; limits delivery hours to 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.; requires Albertson's to chain off the delivery service bays at the times delivery is not permitted; and includes additional landscaping around the perimeter of the remodeled building. Ms. Temple stated that staff and the applicant continued to review the situation after Planning Commission action and the filing of the appeal, particularly as it relates to the current truck delivery traffic and circulation around the center. She reported that the large trucks can make a right turn onto Iris Avenue and proceed directly onto Coast Highway by relocating a guy wire associated with a telephone pole, widening the driveway, and adding red curb along Iris Avenue. Ms. Temple pointed out that the proposed change /additional condition could result in the loss of two to three on -street parking spaces on Iris Avenue in order to allow the truck a sufficient turning radius. She indicated that, if Council wishes to include this solution, there is an additional condition on Page 3 of the staff report that should be added to the list of conditions of approval. In response to Council Member Adams' questions, Ms. Temple confirmed that only right turns can be made onto Coast Highway from Iris Avenue, but that trucks needing to make U -turns can do so at Marguerite. Referencing a letter by Janet Rappaport, Council Member Debay stated that Ms. Rappaport indicated that residents wanting to park near their houses is the problem, not necessarily Albertson's use permit. She pointed out that this is similar to an issue Council heard recently about other streets in Corona del Mar that are being impacted by businesses. In response to Council Member Debay's questions, Ms. Temple indicated that staff initially recommended that delivery be from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; however, the Planning Commission changed it, indicating that 7 a.m. delivery was acceptable in this case. Additionally, she stated that the entrance to the shopping center is a one -way aisle with angled parking and that the Public Works Department feels it is inappropriate to have the large trucks go against the flow of a one -way circulation lane. Mayor O'Neil stated that Planning Commission Chairman Selich indicated that he observed a large delivery truck turning left onto Coast Highway without much problem during the morning hours. Mayor O'Neil expressed the opinion that the driveway could be made to have two -way flow if parking is modified. Ms. Temple stated that she discussed this with Traffic Engineer Edmonston who felt that certain kinds of trucks and high- skilled drivers could make those quick maneuvers; however, Mr. Edmonston advised against making it the primary mode of egress. Further, a significant number of parking spaces in the lot would be lost if the driveway were made to go two -ways and noted that there is a lot of competition for parking in the area Volume 52 - Page 526 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX already. In response to Council Member Debay's question regarding the trash compactor, Ms. Temple stated that she does not believe a time limitation was set, but thought that a similar curfew as the delivery bays' could be established. Council Member Debay reported that Ms. Rappaport also indicated that Albertson's has been very cooperative in working with the residents and even stated that, "...it would appear that the Old Corona del Mar residents' appeal of the Albertson's permit is asking the Council to modify the use permit rather than deny it...." She asked if there was any way to put "teeth" in the requirement that the employees park either in the Albertson's lot or the City lot. Ms. Temple stated that the intent of the condition is to make their use of the Bayside Drive lot the first choice when looking for parking. Additionally, there is incentive to use the lot since Albertson's will be purchasing the blue meter permits for its employees. Ms. Temple believed that it would be difficult to enforce an actual prohibition especially since the shopping center already has a serious parking deficiency. Janet Rappaport, 400 Iris Avenue, stated that she is married to the appellant, Eric Parker, who filed the appeal basically on behalf of the Old Corona del Mar Residents Association. She indicated that he will not be attending the meeting because he left for Europe for the entire summer. Ms. Rappaport stated that they have been working with Albertson's and like the idea of making the neighborhood nice. She stated that they agree with Albertson's regarding the rerouting of trucks. She also indicated that many good ideas were brought up during the Corona del Mar planning charette held over the weekend. Ms. Rappaport agreed with Council Member Debay in wanting some sort of "teeth" for the parking issue. She indicated that she understands that there may be times that parking is not available but believed that this does not happen too frequently. Kimberly Cole, 410 Iris Avenue, thanked Albertson's for their willingness to work with the residents on this issue. She stated that she is happy with the agreement to reroute the trucks and with the parking agreement. She indicated that a protocol for reporting parking violations needs to be established if there were no "teeth" established for parking. She requested that the City also investigate the excessive speeding on Iris Avenue especially since there is a park on both sides of the base, no marked crosswalks, and no signage. Ms. Cole noted that some of the houses on Iris Avenue are built in a canyon and that those houses hear everything that goes on in the area. She asked what type of noise levels will the neighborhood be expecting. Keith Dean, 403 Iris Avenue, also thanked Albertson's for working hard to resolve some of the issues and requested that Council use the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. curfew as the curfew for trash pickup and trash compacting. Regarding the truck route, he suggested moving the truck bay closer to First Street because it will be easier for the trucks to make the right turn and will free residential streets from having the trucks drive onto them. Noting that Iris Avenue has a 3 -ton truck limit, he requested that Albertson's waiver that permits them to drive on Iris Avenue be revoked if a new routing Volume 52 - Page 527 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 is established. Mark Steinman, 1180 W. Lambert Road, Brea, applicant, reported that improvements are being proposed to both the exterior and interior of the store and that they are convinced that they can reroute the trucks. He reported that the telephone company has already agreed to move the guy wire for an additional cost; the driveway can be expanded; and Albertson's will provide a truck for staff to determine how many residential parking spaces will be lost. Regarding the trash compactor, Mr. Steinman stated that Marathon Compactors, the maker of the trash compactor, gave them an acoustical engineers report that indicates that the decibel level will be similar to that of a normal conversation (60 -70 dB). He presented Ms. Temple with the report and noted that the compactor will not be used continuously. Mr. Steinman also stated that they do not have a problem with limiting the trash pick -up and return of the bins to the same hours as truck delivery. He requested that the hours of delivery remain 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and explained that the trucks need to leave the Brea yard early so that the products will be available to the consumers prior to the afternoon hours. He indicated that they do not have a problem with chaining the docks before 7 a.m. and after 8 p.m. or with revoking travel from Iris Avenue towards Bayside Drive. Regarding the ingress and egress out of the driveway onto Coast Highway, Mr. Steinman stated that it is possible but takes one of the better drivers and three vacant parking stalls to make the turn. In response to Mayor O'Neil's questions, Mr. Steinman stated that no parking spaces would be lost in the shopping center if the route were changed. He indicated that Albertson's would probably find out about employees not parking in the Bayside Drive lot from the residents, and that he discussed this with Steve Check, District Manager, who believes that this is reasonably enforceable. Further, there has not been any real complaints or problems from the employees. Mr. Steinman pointed out that requiring employees to park in the shopping center lot if the City lot is full would be in violation of a condition they currently have with the City. Regarding weekends, he stated that there generally is not a full compliment of employees during Farmers Market hours. Mayor O'Neil pointed out that the improvement is to add a mezzanine to increase the storage area, thereby reducing the number of weekly truck trips to the market. Mr. Steinman believed that the truck trips will decrease as many as three to four deliveries a week. He stated that the sales floor area will increase but the footprint of the building will not change. Regarding the condition on page 3 of the staff report, Mr. Steinman indicated that Albertson's accepts the condition. In response to Council Member Debay's questions regarding construction vehicles, he stated that Albertson's selected one of their most experienced and best contractors to do the job and is requiring the contractor to rent a construction yard so that the workers can be carpooled to the site, but noted there will be times when an electrician or plumber truck will be onsite. He indicated that another benefit to selecting a contractor is that it shortens the timeframe. W. Steinman indicated that, once the truck dock and mezzanine are done, work will be Volume 52 - Page 528 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX concurrent for the interior and exterior of the building as much as possible. He reported that Albertson's already has an encroachment permit for the mezzanine work. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions, Mr. Steinman indicated that the mezzanine is across from the dock area and that the dock will be raised to the same elevation as the main building. Council Member Ridgeway suggested moving the dock to the other side of the building so that loading would be off of Jasmine Avenue. He believed this would add ten parking spaces but that the trucks would need to use Jasmine as part of their turning radius. Mr. Steinman indicated that they looked at that suggestion but that it was not physically possible to turn on Jasmine Avenue. He utilized the blueprints to explain the turning situation and added that backing and turning onto Jasmine was undesirable to staff because of its potential danger. Further, he did not believe any additional parking spaces would be gained from moving the loading docks. Mr. Steinman indicated that the architect also drew a sketch for the trucks to enter from Coast Highway and have a through dock, but that this may not be financially feasible. He clarified that Albertson's trucks do back -up; however, that this occurs onsite rather than on City streets. Traffic Engineer Edmonston expressed concern relative to having trucks turn left onto Coast Highway, stating that it would currently take the entire driveway and cause traffic on Coast Highway to stop. He also explained the differences between the trucks reversing on the Albertson's lot versus reversing on Jasmine Avenue. Mr. Edmonston stated that the Albertson's engineers believed that two spaces would be lost with the proposed rerouting and indicated that the two spaces may be based on extremely good driving. He noted that, once the driveway is constructed, Albertson's will send out a driver in order to determine exactly where the red curb needs to be painted. Regarding an earlier comment that Albertson's receives a waiver to drive their trucks on Iris Avenue, Mr. Edmonston clarified that no waiver exists but that, pursuant to the California Vehicle Code, the trucks were allowed to violate the City's truck weight limit because Iris Avenue was the only route they could physically make. He believed that Iris Avenue is already posted to prohibit 3-ton trucks. In response to Council Member Debay's questions regarding excessive speeds on Iris Avenue, Mr. Edmonston indicated that equipment can be placed on Iris to measure speeds and that the Police Department may be willing to also place their trailer on the street. Shirley Conger, 3033 Bayside Drive, stated that her home has been impacted by large trucks, not necessarily Albertson's trucks, traveling down Iris, turning onto Bayside, and passing her house. She added that this happens at odd hours and expressed delight that the trucks will be rerouted. Regarding speeding vehicles, she believed that the average driver on Bayside travels at 45 mph and hoped that the prohibition of trucks on Iris Avenue will be enforced. She indicated that she attended the Corona del Mar design charette and that there were many good ideas for improving the environment. Volume 52 - Page 529 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 Dr. Richard Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, stated that Albertson's knows when trucks will be coming so they can utilize the parking spaces accordingly. He believed that the trucks could turn left onto Coast Highway if someone stopped traffic and that this would take less time than having the trucks U -turn at Marguerite. Dr. Nichols reviewed the history of the parking problems, believing that these are cases in which restaurants are allowed to move into a commercial location when they have special requirements that are not being met. He stated that Albertson's has been a pretty good neighbor but that they did not have a use permit since it was old. Regarding Council Member Ridgeway's suggestion to back-up the trucks onto Jasmine, lien Wirgler, 207 Via Koron and owner of 415 Jasmine, stated that the maneuver is difficult since there is a telephone pole in the parking lot. He expressed concern relative to the delivery hours, noting that deliveries occur at hours like 5 a.m. and 11 p.m. and that it is not just Albertson's trucks that are delivering to this area at odd hours. He encouraged Council to continue the noise curfew for the trash compactors and trash pickup. He added that the other businesses in the center also produce a lot of garbage. Council Member Glover stated that she would like to see all the trucks ingress and egress from Coast Highway because this would be most important to the residents. Pauline Wall, 413 Iris Avenue, indicated that she brought this to the City's attention years ago and that Albertson's trucks have never changed their ways. She stated that the drivers do not contribute anything to the City and that she has checked with the Police Department who indicated that the drivers have never received a ticket. She suggested that Albertson's hire other drivers if they do not comply and requested that Council consider the neighborhood's quality of life. Charles Masters, business property owner, expressed concern relative to requiring employees to park offsite, believing that they also have the right to use public streets. Further, he does not believe that Albertson's should be required to buy parking permits for parking areas that are supposed to be for the public. He stated that Albertson's should not lose customer parking spaces just to accommodate a few people. Mr. Masters expressed the opinion that directing employers to require their employees to park offsite is unfair to the business community. Margaret Mary Butt, P.O. Box 522, Corona del Mar, stated that everyone has to use common sense when planning businesses and recited "God Sense" by John Oxenham. She believed that Albertson's serves the community and that it has been a wonderful market. She stated that noise is unavoidable when there is a market and that traffic will always be a problem. Ms. Butt indicated that there would be a better world if everyone was kind and helped each other and informed Council of an incident that involved the Manager of Albertson's and a resident. Susan Dean, 403 Iris Avenue, stated that Planning Commission Chairman Selich suggested legally establishing an officially designated shopping center Volume 52 - Page 530 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX that encompasses all six businesses on the two adjacent parcels. She believed that Albertsons is legally non - conforming because it does not own or have any property that has one single parking space on it since it is built to the lot line. Further, Albertson s was permitted to lower their ratio when the floor area space ratio was discussed because they were allowed to use the square footage for all the parcels that are adjacent to them. Ms. Dean noted that this was initiated because the Coastal Commission wanted to keep beach access available to the public since it is being limited by employee all-day parking. She stated that three of the businesses have a condition in their use permit that requires employees to park onsite. Ms. Dean believed that, even if Council implements the merger ordinance to combine the two commonly owned parcels, the offsite parking agreement will only address the "tip of the iceberg" and many other issues will still need to be resolved before any expansion can be approved. Ms. Dean added that her children are afraid to play out front because of the trucks that drive by and the speeding vehicles. Fran Rahimi, 412Yz Iris Avenue, stated that everyone agrees that this is a great project but wanted to know who to turn to if the agreement is not being abided by, noting that the trucks were waiting in front of the store at 6 a.m. Ms. Rahimi expressed concern relative to the trash enclosure, stating that there is a health issue since there are many rats in that area. Mr. Steinman stated that Albertson's has tried to alleviate as many of the problems as possible but that, if this cannot be worked out, they will just do a regular remodel. Mayor O'Neil stated that the community understands that Albertson s is trying to make it better but there is an incompatibility of land uses in Corona del Mar and other parts of the City, and that Council has to try to balance the interests. Mr. Steinman stated that the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. curfew would be very difficult for them to follow, noting that they agreed to a 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. curfew at the Planning Commission meeting when they had no restrictions prior to that. He reiterated that they intend to have a chain across the docks before 7 a.m. and after 8 p.m. In response to Mayor O'Neil's question regarding Ms. Dean's merger suggestion, City Attorney Burnham stated that he believes the City can initiate merger proceedings without the owners consent, but noted that he is unsure if the merger would address any of the residents' concerns. There being no further testimony, Mayor O'Neil closed the public hearing. Motion by Mavor O'Neil to sustain the action of the Planning Commission with the addition of the condition that prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits to widen the driveway closest to First Avenue from the parking lot onto Iris Avenue. The work on the driveway shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. Upon completion of the driveway widening, delivery trucks shall be required to exit the shopping center from this driveway and turn right onto Iris Avenue. Delivery trucks shall be Volume 52 - Page 531 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 south down Iris Avenue and Jasmine Avenue First Avenue. In response to Council Member Noyes' questions, Mr. Steinman stated that no company will pay its driver to sit around at 5 a.m. because it would ruin the whole routing schedule. Additionally, vendors will learn to reroute their trucks once enforcement begins. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. Mayor O'Neil expressed the opinion that it would be appropriate to look into the merger issue. He also requested that City Manager Bludau check with the Police Department to see if there is anything that can be done to enforce the speeding law and the truck tonnage limitation. Ms. Temple stated that the Planning Commission Chairman has requested a parcel merger report for their review. Council Member Debay requested that a noise curfew be considered for areas in which residents abut commercial sites. Ms. Temple indicated that there are regulations (Community Noise Ordinance, NBMC Section10.26) relating to the flow of noise for all types of land uses. Council Member Debay stated that she will meet with Ms. Temple to discuss this further. Mayor O'Neil recessed the Council meeting at 9:30 p.m. Mayor O'Neil reconvened the Council meeting at 9:45 p.m. 30. TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE — PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 15.40 OF THE NBMC, TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE, TO PROVIDE THAT CIRCULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED FOR A DEVELOPMENT ARE ROUGHLY PROPORTIONAL TO THAT PROJECT'S IMPACT, TO MODIFY THE DEFINITION OF FEASIBLE IMPROVEMENT, TO ESTABLISH A THRESHOLD FOR TRAFFIC IMPACTS THAT REQUIRE CIRCULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND TO CHANGE THE NUMBER OF AFFIRMATIVE VOTES NEEDED TO OVERRIDE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE TO 5 /7THS OF THE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE. Mayor O'Neil opened the public hearing. City Attorney Burnham utilized four flow charts to illustrate the differences between the existing and proposed Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). He stated that the flow charts use a proposed project that is scheduled for completion in five years, noting that there is a separate provision for projects that will be completed in a timeframe that is longer than five years. Mr. Burnham indicated that the first thing to determine under the existing TPO is whether the project generates more than 300 average daily trips (ADT). If the project does not, then the project satisfies the TPO. However, if the project does, the next thing to determine is whether the project trips contribute more than 1% of the trips at any leg of any critical intersection Volume 52 - Page 532 INDEX Traffic Phasing Ordinance (53/26) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 U I o►, during any 2%s -hour peak period. He added that the flow charts indicate both the existing TPO provisions as well as the administrative guidelines which have been developed by staff and Council over the years to administer provisions of the TPO. He believed that they are very consistent with both the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Mr. Burnham stated that the project is exempt from the TPO if the project does not contribute at least 1% of the trips at any leg of any critical intersection during that 2% -hour peak period. If it does, then intersection capacity utilization calculations are prepared by the Traffic Engineer or the consultant. If the calculations establish that the project would cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection, then there is another set of calculations to conduct. He clarified that "to cause and make worse an unsatisfactory level of service" means that the project will cause an intersection to become worse in Level of Service D (LOS D) or will cause an existing intersection that is operating worse in LOS D to become worse still. Mr. Burnham stated that the City then determines if the project proponent is willing to mitigate if the project would cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any intersection. And if so, the City analyzes the project to determine if findings for approval can be supported by substantial evidence in the record. Council or the Planning Commission, as appropriate, then determines if findings for approval can be made and the project can go forward. If not, the project proponent has the option of requesting that Council or the Planning Commission, on review or appeal, override the TPO by a 617th vote. He stated that the project proponent has the option, if an override is not obtained, to downsize the project. The project is then evaluated at the point where it is determined that it contributes sufficient traffic at any leg of an intersection to warrant further analysis. In response to Council Member Glover's questions, Mr. Burnham explained that the Public Works Department, through Traffic Engineer Edmonston and a traffic consultant, would determine what improvements are necessary to mitigate the impacts of the project. He stated that a cost estimate is typically prepared once the improvements are identified and then Council or the Planning Commission determines whether the project warrants a requirement that the project proponent fund the entire cost of the improvement or whether the project is too large for that. There are certain findings that could still allow the project to move forward. Mr. Burnham clarified that the Planning Commission takes final action, subject to the right of Council, to call up the project or the right of someone to appeal it. Mr. Burnham stated that the second flow chart demonstrates the changes that are being proposed to the ordinance. He noted that the analysis of whether the project generates more than 300 ADT is still conducted. However, the proposed TPO contemplates the deletion of the next test of whether the project contributes 1% or more to the trips at any leg of any intersection. He reported that one now goes directly to the Intersection Volume 52 - Page 533 u 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 Capacity Utilization (ICU) calculation and determines if the project trips do not increase the ICU by at least .005 at any intersection. If this is the case, the project complies with the TPO. If not, then it is determined whether the project causes or makes worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service and whether the project proponent is willing to mitigate. Mr. Burnham stated that one goes back to findings for approval and, if there are no facts or insufficient facts to support findings for approval, the project proponent can request an override. The Planning Commission is recommending that Council reduce the vote for an override from 617th to 517th. Mr. Burnham reported that those are the only changes proposed to the overall process in the TPO. Council Member Adams pointed out that there is another flow chart to follow that goes into detail on the findings for approval and provides the overall schematic of the ordinance. He clarified that the pink diamonds indicate a change; the pink diamonds with dashed borders indicate an eliminated process; and the solid bordered pink diamonds indicate the changes being proposed in the broad scope of the ordinance. Mr. Burnham noted the "Findings for Approval" box on the charts and indicated that more detailed flow charts have been developed to show what occurs in the existing and proposed TPO. Mr. Burnham stated that the first determination, under "Findings for Approval ", is whether there are improvements that can be made at all impacted critical intersections that will cause the project not to make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service. If this is true and those improvements can be made or are expected to be made within one year after the project is occupied, then Council or the Planning Commission can approve the project. If there are feasible improvements that are not going to be completed within a one year period after occupancy, Council or the Planning Commission can still approve the project if it is found that the cost of the improvement is clearly disproportionate to the size of the project; that the improvement will be complete within four years; that the project proponent pays a fee; and that the improvement and the fee substantially outweigh the impacts at any critical intersection that cannot be improved. If there are no feasible improvements that can be constructed at all impacted critical intersections, the project can still be approved if the project proponent makes all feasible improvements; if the project proponent makes improvements at other intersections in which the benefits outweigh the impact at the impacted but unimproved intersections; and if there is an overall improvement in traffic congestion. Mr. Burnham stated that, if those findings for approval cannot be made, the project proponent has the option of requesting an override from Council or the Planning Commission. If the override is denied, then there is no project or the project can be downsized and the process starts over. Mr. Burnham stated that the fourth flow chart reflects the "Findings of Approval" under the proposed TPO. He reported that the first diamond is divided and made more specific so that, if the project trips do not cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of service, Council or the Planning Commission can approve it or, as before, the project can be approved if the Volume 52 - Page 534 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX project trips will impact a critical intersection but there is an improvement that can be made and that improvement will be made within one year of occupancy. He indicated that, if the improvements at the intersection will not be made within one year after occupancy, the project can be approved if the cost of the improvement is disproportionate to the size of the project; if the improvement will be complete in four years; and if the project proponent pays a fee to more closely reflect the benefits to the City of making the improvement, the contribution of the project proponent, and the trips of the project to that intersection. Mr. Burnham believed that the proposed fee provision would require a greater fee from a project proponent and makes sure that the fee is proportionate to the benefits that the intersection improvement conferred, as well as proportionate to the impact of the project trips at the intersection. Mr. Burnham reported that the proposed deletions include the last finding which requires that the benefit substantially outweigh the impacts. This was done because of the concern that the terminology is inconsistent with the recent court decisions that require rough proportionality between project impacts and conditions. Mr. Burnham stated that there is a way to improve a project which does impact a critical intersection where there is no feasible improvement since the project proponent is required to make all feasible improvements. He reported that the balancing provisions have been modified to require that the project proponent either make improvements at intersections in the vicinity of the critical intersection that cannot be improved; that the project proponent make improvements at intersections that are projected to function at or above .80; or that the project proponent make contributions to a plan that would mitigate the potential increased commuter traffic in a residential neighborhood near or adjacent to the critical intersection that cannot be feasibly improved. Mayor O'Neil stated that the reason Council is considering modifying the TPO is because of the rough proportionality test and the nexus requirements under the case laws. He reiterated that the fees could be used to make traffic improvements that are not related to the impacts of the project but questioned how this would reach the nexus. Mr. Burnham pointed out that the current TPO has no nexus and allows the project proponent to make intersection improvements distant from the project where there was no impact by project trips. He stated that, during the TPO working group, technical advisory committee, and the Planning Commission process, the focus was on what the project proponent would need to do in order to obtain approval. He noted that one of the criteria was that the project proponent make improvements to intersections in the vicinity of the impacted intersection and that the project proponent make improvements at intersections that are projected to function at or above .80. He stated that, in both cases, there is a statement that these would be intersections which are impacted by project trips or contribute to a plan that is related to the congestion at an intersection which is impacted by the project. Mr. Burnham believed that, through the revised balancing provisions, a clear nexus between project impacts and project conditions is established. I 0 Volume 52 - Page 535 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX In response to Council Member Mover's questions, Mr. Burnham stated that the existing TPO leaves the decision of which of the three mitigation choices is appropriate to Council or the Planning Commission, and that there is no provision in the proposed TPO that establishes a priority for the mitigation measures. He indicated that the proposed TPO does retain the three options, but modifies the test on two of the options. He clarified that the following process will remain the same in the existing and proposed TPO: the traffic study will be prepared under the direction of the Traffic Engineer and then it will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and approval, if approval is warranted. Regarding Section 15; 40.030.A.l.c.fi., Council Member Ridgeway expressed the opinion that that choices b and c are fairly attenuated from having a nexus and that this will create a fatal flaw in the draft. He stated that the draft talks about impacted critical intersections but questioned if it should be using impacted intersections that have a nexus to the project. He asked if a standard should be established for impacted intersections by a project. Mr. Burnham stated that the TPO does not have a current standard. Council Member Ridgeway emphasized that the current TPO is flawed because of the proportionality and because of nexus, adding that the City is just creating a new TPO that starts out on a flawed nexus. Mr. Burnham clarified that the threshold of significance at any critical intersection that the Planning Commission is proposing is .005 ICU. He expressed the opinion that there is a nexus in Section 15.40.030.A.l.c.if.a because it talks about improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips; and subsection c has sufficient nexus because it talks about contributions to a plan that is designed to mitigate the impact of project trips in an adjacent residential area. However, subsection b should be revised to read, "Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips and improve critical intersections operating, or projected to operate..." Noting that the first portion of the presentation talked about ICU analysis by project because those are directly related and are short term in nature, Council Member Ridgeway took issue, stating that the circulation system is a long term view at the improvements that are needed. He stated that subsection c is talking about the circulation system as a whole instead of ICU analysis directly related to the project. He believed that the proposed TPO addresses proportionality but does not address nexus. Council Member Ridgeway suggested using "impacted intersections by the project" rather than using "critical intersections' that may be across town from the project. Mr. Burnham stated that the legal reasons for proposing the amendments to the TPO are because of the common requirement that project conditions be roughly proportional to project impacts. As part of this, there is a requirement that project conditions bear a relationship or nexus to project impact. Mr. Burnham stated that another legal issue is because of a concern that he and private counsel have of the potential for the TPO to single out and treat unfairly a particular property owner. He noted that the TPO has a tendency to do this because people who develop projects earlier than later are less likely to be impacted by the TPO. However, given the fact that there . may be certain critical intersections that Council is unwilling or unprepared to make the improvements to and to the extent that Council is unwilling to Volume 52 - Page 536 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX make those changes to the intersection could result in the denial of a project when applying the TPO, there was a concern that the property owner may be singled out unfairly on two separate grounds. He indicated that, when that happens, courts tend to look very carefully at what cities have done and tried to correct any perceived inequity. Mr. Burnham reported that the Planning Commission recommended some changes to the TPO that deletes the concept of exempt intersection and substitutes a definition of feasible improvements that he hopes expands the category as broadly as possible without capturing those improvements which Council would prefer not to see made or intends not to make within a given timeframe. Council Member Ridgeway took issue, believing that the City is moving circular with the concepts. He expressed the opinion that the second issue is one of inverse condemnation. He stated that inverse condemnation has not been fully adjudicated by the Supreme Court and that the Supreme Court has basically said that there is no inverse condemnation if a city leaves the property owner a viable beneficial use for the property. He suggested writing in some type of adjustment into the TPO that can be looked at in the future if there is a fear of this. He noted that the court has supported that concept in unpublished opinions. Mr. Burnham believed it was not correct to say that the Supreme Court determined that there is no inverse condemnation so long as the property owner has some viable economic use of the property. He noted that the Cavanaugh case was recently decided in the Supreme Court and that they did not find a taking but described 13 factors that could go into the determination of whether there was a taking in this particular case. This included a reasonable investment-backed expectation of the property owner. Further, the Supreme Court said that the 13 criteria for evaluating his case was not exclusive. He expressed concern that there is the potential for an inverse condemnation litigation whenever there is one of the 13 criteria and a perceived inequity. He emphasized that the proposed TPO is trying to establish a framework that will minimize the potential for that to fall out of the ordinary traffic study and traffic analysis in the approval process, rather than put it in something similar to the suggested provision that basically means that the City will not take anyone's property through the application of the ordinance. Mr. Burnham stated that this is an option available to Council but requires a fairly detailed and complicated legal analysis every time Council is presented with a traffic study. Council Member Ridgeway disagreed that, under the current situation, if Council chooses not to make an improvement, Council has inversely condemned someone's property. Additionally, every parcel has some type of zoning and has a reasonable expectation under that zoning. He stated that the proposed change creates a situation for someone to come in for a more aggressive approved project. He believed that no one's property can be condemned at this present time under the City's current General Plan. He also noted that the Cavanaugh case was remanded. Mr. Burnham stated that he had Phil Conn, Laguna Beach City Attorney, generally review the TPO as it applied to a property similar to the Ardell property. He believed that, although Mr. Conn felt he could not guarantee an adverse decision, Mr. Conn indicated to him and the Planning Commission that there was Volume 52 - Page 537 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14,1999 INDEX some risk of receiving an adverse ruling if the person simply applied for a project that would be permitted under existing zoning and General Plan designation. In response to Council Member Glover's statement, Mr. Burnham stated that he believed Council Member Ridgeway's point was that the TPO only applies to projects that generate 300 ADT, therefore, there are some projects that any property owner could construct that would not be subject to the TPO. Regarding the Ardell property, he stated that his recollection is that, under current General Plan and zoning designations, the property is authorized for about 120,000 or 130,000 square feet of commercial or office use. He stated that the TPO applies to any project of at least 25,000 or 30,000 square feet. He noted that this would be a significant reduction if a property owner downsized their project to avoid the application of the TPO. Regarding the consistencies between the standards of the TPO and the General Plan, Mr. Burnham stated that the TPO has some statements that indicate it is designed to deal with near term impacts of projects. He indicated that Council Member Ridgeway correctly noted that one of the conditions of the subsection discusses contributions to a plan to mitigate potentially long term traffic. Mr. Burnham stated that another legal issue that has been raised before is whether LOS D standards are consistent with the City's circulation element which projects/predicts ICUs in excess of LOS D, especially in the airport area. Council Member Ridgeway stated that, if there was an intersection where the City did not make improvements but then chose to make them, the City is limited by land area and geometries as to what improvements can be placed there. He noted that adequate improvements cannot be made for Ardell to build a 120,000 square foot building which, under Mr. Burnham's analysis, makes this inverse condemnation. Council Member Ridgeway disagreed that this is inverse condemnation. Traffic Engineer Edmonston stated that he has worked with the TPO during its entire 21 years of existence and processed over 150 projects through it. He reported that, in reviewing these projects, many inconsistencies and gaps were identified in both the existing ordinance and the administrative procedures, and that staff has worked hard to eliminate those problems. Mr. Edmonston stated that, even though the inconsistencies were identified, he does not believe they have ever been used to a developers advantage since they are generally identified early in the process. He reported that the following are the 5 key areas that the proposed TPO addresses: 1) combining the ordinance and the administrative procedures into one document; 2) updating the definitions; 3) creating a clear basis for trip generation rates; 4) using the City's model to get trip distribution methodology for calculating ICUs; and 5) explaining how approval expires once a project is approved. Mr. Edmonston stated that a comparison of how the existing and proposed ordinances treat projects was conducted using the Corona del Mar Plaza project at the Newport Center area as the larger project, and the Burger . King at Jamboree and Birch in the airport area as the smaller project. He reported that, under both ordinances, the same intersections were identified Volume 52 - Page 538 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX as being impacted and that the same types of mitigation measures would have also been identified. Regarding the Burger King project, he noted that the impact at one intersection was .006 due to a revision in the project to eliminate one car; otherwise, it would have been less than .005 and they would not have had to mitigate the intersection. He believed that, using these examples, no changes occurred although there might have been if the proponent was given a clearer way to identify what needs to be done in order to not be in the mitigation category. In response to Council Member Ridgeway's questions, Mr. Edmonton stated that he believed that the new TPO has addressed all the old inconsistencies; however, new inconsistencies may arise as the TPO is applied. Council Member Adams stated that he is a consulting traffic engineer; has been putting this ordinance into practice for over 18 years; and has put traffic studies together for the City. He noted that, as a Planning Commissioner, he reviewed traffic studies and the implementation of the ordinance from the City's perspective. Council Member Adams stated that the issue of changing the TPO first surfaced when he was on the Planning Commission about 3 years ago. He indicated that there was a proposal to change the policy that would increase entitlement in the airport area and other areas in the City. He characterized it as loosening -up the TPO to accommodate increased development and that he was concerned with this at the time. A TPO task force was formed from members of the Planning Commission, Council, Building Industry Association (BIA), Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, and Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON) and met for over 18 months. He believed that the ideas of changing the policy fell out and the focus shifted to changing the ordinance to simply address the legal issues that Mr. Burnham outlined. He stated that he is convinced that Council is at the point where only a minimal change is being proposed to only bolster it to legal challenge. Council Member Adams stated that the whole point of the TPO is to make sure that the roadway system keeps pace with development, noting that the existing ordinance says that on face value. He indicated that a previous flow chart had a "Downsize" diamond which he believed may have, to a certain extent, affected development in the City. Council Member Adams believed that the various individuals who sat on the TPO committee made a significant impact on the drafting of the TPO and that this has been a collaborative effort. Council Member Adams stated that, since last week's Planning Commission meeting, there have been a couple of minor suggested text changes. He suggested adding a fee calculation example into the administrative procedures to demonstrate how a project proponent funds construction improvements (Subsection 15.40.30.A.l.d.iii). He stated that Subsection 15.40.30.A.l.d.iii needs refinement, believing that it is trying to say that the improvement betters the intersection capacity by some percentage amount if an improvement is made to an intersection. Regarding Subsection 15.40.30.B.3.a, Council Member Adams suggested that the exemption clause be limited to the City's sphere of influence, and read, "The Project would be constructed on property within the sphere of influence in the City of Newport Beach and is within the jurisdiction of the County..." He suggested that Subsection 15.40.030.c.ii be amended to read, "...in any 24 month Volume 52 - Page 539 0 0 E City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 period, generate more than 300 average daily trips above the baseline for the Project." Regarding Subsection 15.40.030.c.iii, he suggested striking out all of the text after the word "annexation." Council Member Adams suggested amending Subsection 15.40.040.0 (Feasible Improvement) to read, "That is contemplated by, or not inconsistent with ... and that is identified as an improvement to be construction or designed in whole or in part in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)." In Subsection 15.40.075.13, he recommended that "short term impacts' be changed to "near term impacts," and that "or a development agreement approved pursuant to Chapter 15.45" be stricken from the text. Council Member Glover reported that there are six proposed exempt intersections and that four of those are in her district. She pointed out that, if there is no mitigation on these non - feasible intersections, there is high potential for impacts on the residential areas. She emphasized that she has no intention of supporting the TPO unless the impacts are properly addressed. Council Member Ridgeway reiterated that the document is deficient. He stated that the issue is with impacted intersections but that there is no definition for this in the ordinance. He also stated that the ordinance does not incorporate the CIP by reference. He added that the feasible improvement must become fixed within the CIP and cannot be removed from it without the provisions of an override if a project is going to be approved with a finding that there was a feasible improvement. He believed that this entire document avoids this. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he would approve a project if a project proponent can mitigate the impacts and believed that the City can write a TPO that is much simpler and directly addresses the issue of impacted intersections at or near a project. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, stated that everyone has worked very hard on this and that he agrees with Council Member Ridgeway, Council Member Glover, and Council Member Adams. He expressed the opinion that all this work is being done but no one has figured out the basic objective. He stated that there are varying viewpoints and that the City has a conflict it has not yet resolved. Once resolved, he believed that a TPO can be written to fix whatever it is the City is trying to do. Mr. Beek reiterated that the genesis for the TPO was the desire to have more development, but that this proposal more than doubles the threshold requirement; reduces the override requirements; provides that intersections can be exempted by a Council majority vote; and declares some improvements to be infeasible. Mr. Beek indicated that the actual goal was to achieve proportionality but this has not occurred. Additionally, the fees have been reduced for those who were paying too much, but nothing has been done to those who have been paying too little. He indicated that he, Council Member Adams, and Mr. Burnham discussed how this could be done during the recess. Mr. Beek stated that he has a list of other things that he believes is wrong with the TPO and left a copy with the City Clerk. He expressed concern that the threshold between Level of Service D and Level of Service E was originally 90 percent, but has now been moved to 90.5 %. This gives developers a big break since, as the Volume 52 - Page 540 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX intersections get more loaded, this gives them a year of grace in which they do not have to mitigate their impact. He believed that Council Member Ridgeway's point about not meeting nexus is a valid point and stated that there is a lot more work needed in order to make this a reasonable and feasible amendment to the TPO. In response to Council Member Debay's question, Ms. Temple indicated that she does not know of any other city in Orange County that has a separate ordinance related to traffic study procedures. She reported that most communities handle traffic analysis and impact mitigation through CEQ,A review and the Environmental Quality Act. Council Member Debay stated that she believed that the basic reason the TPO was created in 1979 was because there was a "no growth" majority Council at the time. She agreed that trying to fix this has been a real problem. She commended those who want to maintain a quality of life, but noted that developers build larger projects around the airport area that also impacts the City. She stated that, if the TPO does not get fixed in a reasonable manner, she could see herself suggesting that the City not have a TPO. Mayor O'Neil stated that he chaired the TPO committee a couple of years ago and that good meetings were conducted which he hoped would eventually lead to an ordinance that everyone could live with. He noted that he even asked why the City had the ordinance during the first meeting of the TPO committee. He believed that there still are legal problems with the ordinance that could expose the City to liability even though it served a good purpose over the last 20 -25 years and controlled development. Mayor O'Neil asked how much development is really left for the City and what control the City has over development around the surrounding cities. He assured that Council was not trying to somehow circumvent the purpose of the TPO to provide a blank check for development to run rampant in the City; that there is not that much more development that can be done; and that Council is not paid by the developers to make decisions that would provide more profit to them. He asked if there was a work product that can come out of this effort and if the City needs a TPO since there is still CEQA and the Fair Share Ordinance. Mayor O'Neil stated that, if a sense of consensus cannot be reached on both sides of the issue, he may make a motion to repeal the TPO. Philip Bettencourt, 9 Executive Circle, Irvine, representing the Building Industry Association and Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, stated that he and some of his colleagues were on the TPO committee. He indicated that he came to the meeting to generally, but reluctantly, embrace the proposed TPO so that there was something to follow in terms of reform, believing that the process has only served those in the "no growth" camp because nothing has been fixed. He likened fixing the TPO to unraveling a tangled fishing reel, but that the committee started the process in good faith because they thought it was important and the ordinance has a certain confidence level within the environmental activists. Mr. Bettencourt stated that the original agenda given to Council by his group and the EDC does not have an exempt intersection list; a separate level of service standards for the airport area business district; a pooling of intersections or intersection averaging when calculating litigation; or a relief for small businesses. He believed that fixing the ordinance is the right thing to do and pointed out Volume 52 - Page 541 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 that Council can also use the General Plan and adopt specific plans, enforce floor area ratios, adopt height restrictions and parking requirements, have environmental reviews, have development agreement bargaining, and utilize the fair share fee formula. He believed that there has not been a shred of evidence to ever demonstrate that the fair share fee formula is not providing for adequate and reasonable mitigation. He expressed the opinion that the City cannot wrap up every land use decision and every hypothetical decision in this instrument. H. Ross Miller, 1627 Bay Cliff Circle, stated that he is the Advocacy Chairman for the Friends of the Oasis Senior Center and the Secretary of the Community Associations Alliance. He questioned the notification process, expressing the opinion that the notice in the newspaper is insufficient notification for the community. He stated that the senior community is concerned about the uncontrolled intersections, noting that the six intersections are major routes to Hoag Hospital. He indicated that some residents rush their loved ones to the hospital in their own vehicles and do not have lights or sirens to deal with the traffic. He believed that Council needs testimony from the Fire and Marine Chief, Police Chief, private ambulance operators, and Hoag Hospital officials before making any decisions, noting that there is no clause in the TPO that states that "public safety and public welfare will not be impacted." Mr. Miller expressed the opinion that the Planning Commission completely ignored the scheduled build -out of Newport Center. He noted that some of those buildings are high rises and that this means there will be thousands of daily trips through the City from people who do not live in the City. He believed that the TPO can be left as it is, but suggested changing the financial arrangements so that the developers pay a proportional amount; and exempting the new office buildings at Fashion Island from the proposed TPO and require them meet the requirements of the present TPO. He expressed the opinion that the City is opening themselves up to action by CalTrans who has the objective to move traffic. Council Member Debay noted that the intersection at Superior and Pacific Coast Highway has posed a problem for the area and is an intersection that leads to Hoag Hospital. She indicated that a reason it has become a problem is because people have stopped building the Wh Street bridge that goes across the Santa Ana River. She expressed the opinion that this artificial constraint is being placed on Newport Beach is unfair. Fire and Marine Chief Riley reported that the current TPO and the proposed TPO do not have a significant impact on the way they provide services. He stated that Newport Beach is one of the few cities in Orange County that has a traffic engineering system that embraces the issue of traffic preemption or signal preemption. He explained that the system has key, strategically located intersections throughout the corridor that lead up to the hospitals where fire and paramedic vehicles can take complete control of the intersection and stop all traffic through signal control regardless of traffic pattern. He stated that, historically, there are areas with additional traffic demands, but they have appropriate traffic patterns to get to the hospitals. Additionally, Chief Riley stated that they have red lights and sirens that Volume 52 - Page 542 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX they can use but only utilize under conditions of extreme emergencies. Regarding heart attack victims, he indicated that all the transport units are paramedic equipped and have advanced life support capability. He reported that they would not use the lights and sirens unless the condition warrants getting to the emergency room immediately. Council Member Adams stated that the signal preemption device works by using strobe lights on the vehicle to assure that there will be a green signal for the emergency vehicle well in advance of the vehicle approaching the intersection. Police Captain Paul Henisey stated that he serves as the Captain in charge of the PatroYrraffic Division. After being in the City for 23 years, he expressed the opinion that traffic has improved, recalling that PCH has been jammed beyond Jamboree to go across the Bay Bridge. Further, he believed that the significant traffic on the peninsula has also been mitigated. Captain Henisey believed that the City probably enjoys the best response time (approximately 3 minutes) of all Police Departments in Orange County due to the way the Newport Beach Police Department deploys personnel. He explained the deployment process and indicated that this allows them to keep their response times low no matter what type of traffic problem may occur. Captain Henisey concurred with Chief Riley in that there would not be significant changes in their response times when using the current or proposed TPO. Council Member Glover stated that Council is opposed to the Safe and Healthy Initiative that South County cities have brought before the County which requests that a Countywide vote occur if a city were to have a jail, landfill, or airport. She indicated that she was told that an initiative would be started, depending on whether the City adopts a TPO tonight, that would put projects that need General Plan amendments to a vote of the people and would no longer be voted on by Council. She stated that Council is working as hard as possible to protect the citizens and ensure that the City does not have a new airport in the area, noting that there will be a new airport somewhere in the County. She indicated that there will probably be a new airport at John Wayne Airport if the Safe and Healthy Initiative goes through. Council Member Glover stated that it looks like the City will soon have two initiatives to fight, believing that the other initiative is similar to the Safe and Healthy Initiative. She proposed that staff examine what the CEQA process entails and also agreed that it may be time to go to this process since the TPO has served its purpose. Dr. Richard Nichols, 519 Iris, expressed the opinion that Corona del Mar may not be impacted now but will be impacted soon because there are three intersections at the .80 threshold. Further, he believed that Old Corona del Mar has been serving as the `sewer" for City traffic. He stated that the streets were not built that needed to be built and that the streets that were put in do not run traffic on them, believing that it does not make sense that his community should suffer. Dr. Nichols stated that the big issue that was discussed during the charette was slowing traffic down in Corona del Mar and stated that it was even suggested that a tunnel be built Volume 52 - Page 543 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 underneath Coast Highway if the City wants to keep traffic flowing through Corona del Mar. He pointed out that the TPO states that building should stop if certain road capacities are exceeded. He indicated that one of the architects believed that Corona del Mar is one of the most unique communities in all the south coast area and has higher land values than anywhere else in Newport Beach. Lula Halfacre, 1907 Tahuna Terrace, Chairman of the Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce, expressed respect for all the time and studies that have gone into the TPO process. She stated that she supports the TPO, believing that this to be the right thing for the community as a whole. Gary DiSano, 1840 Leeward Lane, stated that he is representing the Economic Development Committee (EDC) who has had an interest in revising the TPO longer than probably any other group in the City (1996). He indicated that the EDC recommended an earlier proposal to revise the General Plan, Circulation Element, and the TPO, but because of questions by the Planning Commission, the proposal was tabled and the scope of the TPO revision project was narrowed. Mr. DiSano reported that the EDC continues to support two features of the original proposal: changing the override vote from 6 /7th to 5 /7th; and adding that Level of Service D in the airport area be exceeded. Additionally, the EDC recommends that the ordinance be amended so that traffic studies are required for projects that generate 500 ADT, rather than 300 ADT; rough proportionality provisions are added for fairness and to limit the threat of lawsuits from developers; the rounding problem is corrected so that mitigation is not being required for miniscule impacts especially when those impacts are calculated using a lot of assumptions and data as much as 2'/s years old; the TPO provides a way for property owners especially in commercial areas where improvement is needed, like in Mariner's Mile, to redevelop their properties in a way that brings economic benefit to the City without having to build intersections that are needed for two hours a day and spoil the beauty of Newport Beach. Mr. DiSano stated that the EDC urges Council to approve the TPO revisions and expressed support of the City's efforts at long range comprehensive planning. He hoped that a more extensive TPO revision can be considered after the planning is done. Christine Iger, 601 Lido Park Drive, representing the Building Industry Association, stated that she has been tracking the TPO because it is unique in Orange County where she deals with mitigation measures professionally. She stated that the BIA supports the Planning Commission's endorsed, reformed package. Dr. Jan Vandersloot, 2221 East 166 Street, expressed concern that the revised TPO will increase traffic congestion in the Riverside /Coast Highway area, as well as at the other impacted intersections. He believed that this is a complex issue that needs more analysis through an environmental impact report. Further, that Council needs to analyze what impacts these revisions will have on the residential communities of Newport Heights and Cliff Haven. He suggested that Council consider resolving the traffic vs. . development problem by revising the General Plan since it has not been revised since 1988. Dr. Vandersloot stated that he is very concerned with Volume 52 - Page 544 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 INDEX the recommendations to reduce the super- majority vote and change the definition of feasible improvement, expressing the opinion that those types of changes significantly weaken the TPO. He disagreed with Police Captain Henisey's statement that traffic has gotten better in the City but stated that, if this is true, it may be because the City has a TPO. Dr. Vandersloot highly recommended not repealing the TPO but stated that, if changes need to be made, they should be minor. He asked that Council consider how much traffic the residents will be enduring in the future. Tim Strater, 3801 Inlet Isle, expressed the opinion that the TPO has been flawed from the beginning because it is based on a false assumption that Newport Beach can solve the regional traffic problems through some type of complicated, technical analysis. He stated that traffic is a regional issue and that no other city has a TPO. Mr. Strater indicated that he is a lawyer and that his law professor and any court judge would laugh the City out of court if they were given an ordinance that needed diagrams to be understood. He expressed the opinion that he does not believe any judge would enforce this ordinance because he would have trouble following the matrix. He stated that it may be time to disband the TPO and use all the tools mentioned by Mr. Bettencourt. He stated that he does not have a problem driving on Coast Highway now that the improvements have been made, but believed that the computer would still indicate that the City has a problem on Coast Highway. He emphasized that people like to come to the City because it is next to the ocean. Council Member Glover stated that the ocean limits how people can get • across town and that traffic ends up being forced onto Coast Highway, which is her district. Mr. Strater stated that he has never seen an ordinance like this, noting that he has developed in 20 or so cities up the west coast. Regarding the CEQA process, he reported that it requires that the worst case scenario be analyzed for its environmental impacts and then discussions held about ways to mitigate those impacts since there is more than one way to mitigate a traffic problem. He stated that he likes the proposed TPO because it goes from the single mitigation factor to giving a menu of options. Council Member Debay asked Council Member Adams if the City could depend on the CEQA process to maintain the City's quality of life. Council Member Adams stated that the City already uses the CEQA process but that the City's focus has been almost "tunnel visioned" through the TPO and may have eclipsed the fact that there is an overriding Environmental Quality Act that the City needs to conform to. Further, the City has been using the TPO analysis process as part of CEQA documentation while most cities follow a traffic impact analysis procedure that is prescribed by the transportation and engineering literature that is straightforward and similar to what the City does in the TPO. Council Member Adams stated that the City has an ordinance that has removed a lot of decision making and clearly identifies the procedures for establishing mitigation. He stated that, on the upside, the TPO has left the City with one of the best street systems of any city in Orange County. Council Member Adams expressed the opinion that the change to the TPO will not have a significant change on the way Council approves traffic impacts on the City. If it did, he indicated that he would not be supportive of it since he opposed previous notions where the TPO did Volume 52 - Page 546 0 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 open things up. Council Member Debay reiterated her two choices of either supporting staff recommendation, including Council Member Adams' changes, or considering repealing the TPO completely. Motion by Council Member Debav to introduce the Ordinance, as amended, and pass to second reading on June 28, 1999. Council Member Adams indicated that the City received a fax tonight from Worden, Williams, Richmond, Brechtel & Gibbs, attorney for SPON, that raises some issues relating to the environmental impact of the proposed TPO. He stated that he has not had time to read the document and that the City Attorney has only briefly examined it. He believed that this is something that the City Attorney needs to address and give his opinion, and that he would need this before he could consider voting on this issue. He reiterated that the ordinance has some language issues that still need to be worked on and that Mr. Beek still has a list of concerns, adding that some of these things can be accommodated while still retaining the essence of what Council is trying to do. Council Member Adams suggested looking at this again in two weeks. In response to Mayor O'Neil's question, Mr. Burnham confirmed that an environmental review will need to be conducted in order to repeal the ordinance. Phil Arst stated that everyone is really talking about the future shape of Newport Beach and that the TPO crutches an out of balance General Plan. Noting that it was said that no other city has a TPO in the County, he stated that this is because Newport Beach is like no other city nor does he want it to be, and applauded Council for their work in preserving the City. Mr. Arst expressed the opinion that the proposed provisions could permit future Councils to change the City into a high rise, congested metropolitan area and supports Mr. Beek's list because it may prevent this from happening. He indicated that there are some loopholes that he would be happy to discuss with Council Member Adams. He distributed a map that depicts future congestion and pointed out that over 1/3 of the City's intersections will be unsatisfactorily congested. Mr. Arst reported that the existing TPO requires all projects to mitigate their impacts concurrent with the development of the project, but that the proposed TPO does not require mitigation concurrency. Additionally, the gridlock permitted by the TPO omits summer traffic analysis. He stated that a careful analysis is needed before the City permits gridlock in the winter also, as shown in the staff prediction. Mr. Arst expressed the opinion that this does not need to be made into something so complex since everyone agrees that what the City needs is a General Plan revision. He stated that, for the good of the City and for future generations, he requests that Council vote against this confusing and ill- conceived proposal and adopt one of the two stop gap measures. He indicated that the other stop gap measure would be to leave the current TPO enforced, as Council Member Ridgeway suggested, and to address the few issues on an override basis. Volume 52 - Page 546 INDEX City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes June 14, 1999 to continue the public hearing to June 28, 1999. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. 31. REQUEST FOR CO -SPONSORSHIP BY THE BALBOA PERFORMING ARTS THEATRE FOUNDATION. Motion by Council Member Debay to approve City co- sponsorship of the Run for the Arts and waive City costs, not to exceed $5,000. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. — None. ADJOURNMENT — 12:05 a.m. on June 15, 1999. The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on June 9, 1999, at 3:30 p.m on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. The supplemental agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on June 11, 1999, at 1:00 p.m on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 52 - Page 547 INDEX Balboa Performing Arts Theatre Foundation (62) • 0 0