The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About00 - Motion for Reconsideration Request (Fire Rings) - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed January 27, 2015 Brown, Leilani Reconsideration of Item From: Denys Oberman <dho @obermanassociates.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 11:37 AM To: DianebDIXON; Scott Peotter; Petros, Tony; kcurry@newportbeachca.gov; eselich @roadrunner.com; kevinmmuldoon @yahoo.com Cc: Kiff, Dave; Brown, Leilani; dho @obermanassociates.com;'Kathryn Branman'; Linda Klein; 'Fredric Mark Levine' Subject: Motion to Reconsider and Solution to Fire Rings Issue - PLEASE DISTRIBUTE AND ENTER INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD Mayor and Council Members: I have previously submitted testimony,including a Request that the Council properly fulfill the direction established in the Session, and correct /reconsider the Motion as has been mischaracterized in staff documents to make it clearly: 30 Fire Rings and Interim Plan . I have walked the current and proposed sites of Fire Ring location.] have also read the Survey staff has created to receive "public input ". 1. With a total of 60 Fire Rings, rather than the 30 proposed, it is IMPOSSIBLE TO REMAIN AT EXISTING LOCATIONS WITHIIN THE "EXISTING FOOTPRINT AND COMPLY WITH AIR QUALITY STANDARDS" IF more than 1/3 of the Rings are wood- burning. 2. The spreading of Wood- burning Fire rings to other coastal locations with Residential community alongside, in clusters or lined up across a long stretch of beach WILL CREATE ADVERSE AIR /ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT TO RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES. 3. The citizens of Newport Beach who live along the coast are largely families and retired /senior people who have worked hard to live here. They are entitled to live in and environment that does not persistently create Second -hand smoke that they are forced to breathe. The Survey and options as stated are not appropriate , nor do the majority of them even accurately characterize what they are suggesting. We request that the Council reconsider and ratify a Motion Confirming the 30 Total, AND that the options menu get reverted to the Public and staff for a meaningful, healthful compromise. Then, and only then, we /the City is in a position to present an acceptable alternative to the Coastal Commission which consider public health, and the goals and values of the Community. As we may be unable to attend tonight's City Council meeting ,we request the Respect of a response from Council and Staff at least acknowledging receipt of this communication. Thank you . Denys Oberman Kathryn Branman Linda Klein Fred Levine Barbara Roy( Barbara does not have Email access, so I will relay a hard copy of response to her.) (Please disregard the Confidentiality Notice at the bottom of this email) Cc Regards, Denys H. Oberman, CEO E fIROBRMA $ftology orid fln anc,crf Advisers OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors 2600 Michelson Drive, Suite 1700 Irvine, CA 92612 Tel (949) 476 -0790 Cell(949)230 -5868 Fax(949)752 -8935 Email: dho (a)obermanassociates.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 9491476.0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange for the return of the document(s) to us. Received After Agenda Printed January 26, 2015 Brown, Leilani Reconsideration of Item From: Denys Oberman <dho@obermanassociates.com> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 3:15 PM To: Dept - City Council; Kiff, Dave; Brown, Leilani Cc: scottrbsn @aol.com; Cindy Koller; karen_tringali @msn.com; Fred Levine; Laura Curran; Denys H. Oberman Subject: Fire Rings Issue- Request for Motion to Reconsider FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD Importance: High Sensitivity: Confidential Mayor and Council: We have reviewed the various records associated with the Council's previous discussion of Interim and Final Plans for the Fire Rings. We have also physically visited the current sites where Fire Rings are located, and reviewed the Mindmaster Survey instrument which proposes to provide a "mechanism for public input" in response to 7 scenarios summarized in the survey. The City has already received voice from both sides of the fence, including "Friends of the Fire Rings" and those Opposing Fire Rings. There are many of us who may be willing to accept, a plan of compromise, subject to the following: • Fire Rings do NOT create smoke plume exposing residential areas to second hand smoke —an established carcinogen • Fire Rings are managed by the City, along with times of permitted use, and regular beach curfew patrol enforcing regulations The Scenarios posed in the Survey: a) Do NOT prevent Residents in area from exposure to concentration of secondhand smoke-- - b) Where it is proposed that "Rings be left in the same footprint ", it is NOT feasible to have the proposed number of pits, AND allow for the required distancing and separation. What Staff function and what Manager specifically is responsible for crafting the Survey? How can the public get meaningful information and provide input who are not in a position to work the City blog and respond on -line? We physically walked the Balboa Penninsula sites yesterday. There are currently 36 Fire Rings at the Balboa Pier - - -18 on each side of the pier. On the side towards Penninsula Point, the Rings are approximately 30 ft. apart; on the other side, they are approximately 10 -12 ft. apart. A similar situation exists in CDM, although a resident reported that the Rings are being relocated as we write. It is unlikely that 60 Fire Rings can be accommodated without creating Adverse Health Impact to Residential Neighbors; and be each 100 feet apart. To confirm, a string of Fire Rings up and down the coastline WILL generate Unhealthful Air Quality with most prevailing wind conditions, so this is not a viable alternative. We need to be working with not more than 30 Fire Rings en toto if we are to provide wood - burning facilities, AND maintain healthy air quality for nearby Residential neighborhoods - - - -to which they /we are entitled . PLEASE - -- Reconsider the motion, and let's take a step back to better understand how to resolve this issue for the benefit of all. Otherwise, we are going to once again spend extensive time and resources with negative consequences to the residents and legal risk to the City rather than getting to what should be a straightforward path to resolution. Thank you, Denys Oberman, Linda Klein, Kathryn Branman Regards, Denys /H. Oberman, CEOp p� LJDERIVMAN Straregyy and €UB nbal Advisors OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors 2600 Michelson Drive, Suite 1700 Irvine, CA 92612 Tel (949) 476 -0790 Cell (949) 230 -5868 Fax(949)752 -8935 Email: dho(d,)obermanassociate--.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 9491476.0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange for the return of the document(s) to us.