Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/23/2002 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session April 23, 2002 - 4:10 p.m. INDEX Present: Heffernan, Bromberg, Glover, Adams, Proctor, Mayor Ridgeway Absent: O Neil (excused) CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Regarding Item No. I I (Tasks and Initial Projects for the Newport Beach Harbor Commission), City Manager Bludau stated that staff would like to add an item to the task list. Planning Director Temple reported that the Harbor Commission is charged with reviewingtcommenting on development projects that may be related to in -bay resources. She reported that the project at the South Coast Shipyard and Design Center includes many bay support uses like boat storage and repair. She believed that the project should be referred to the Harbor Commission, adding that the Planning Commission would probably find their comments helpful in their deliberations. She noted that this type of referral can only be made by Council, the Planning Commission, or the City Manager. Council Member Glover referenced one of the Commissions duty to serve as an appellate and reviewing body on City Manager decisions regarding harbor permits, leases, and other harbor- related administrative matters where the Municipal Code assigns authority to the Harbor Commission. She asked if there was any other committee or commission that serves as an appellate. Assistant City Manager Wood reported that the Planning Commission hears appeals on decisions of the Modifications Commission and Planning staff. Assistant City Manager Kiff indicated that there are some cases where a mooring owner or holder of a commercial harbor permit could contest an administrative action of the Harbor Resources Department. He stated that a person can appeal the decision of the Harbor Resources staff to the City Manager and the Harbor Commission could oversee the appeal. He added that the applicant can also appeal to Council; however, it is set up so the appeal initially goes to the Harbor Commission. He stated that the Harbor Commission would probably mirror what the Planning Commission does relative to appeals and fees. Mr. Bludau noted that a few boat owners came before Council about a year ago to see if they could receive more time to make their vessels seaworthy. He reported that it is the City Manager who determines whether people will be given more time. He stated that the Harbor Commission can now interject between the City Manager and Council in this type of process. He believed that, in this situation, the boat owners would just need to write a letter stating that they want to appeal the matter to Council. Mr. Kiff stated that the method should be made clear if there is no method now. Council Member Glover emphasized that it is important that people still be able to come before Council at some point. Mr. Bludau indicated that the maker of the motion tonight should also direct the City Attorney and City Manager's office to work on Volume 55 - Page 117 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 language to ensure that the appeal process is clear. Regarding conflicts of interests, Council Member Heffernan asked whether the commissioners will have so many conflicts that they will be precluded from addressing many of the items. City Attorney Burnham stated that this may occur, but they have not reviewed their Statements of Economic Interests which will be turned into the City Clerk. He indicated that they will review those, evaluate whether individuals have conflicts, and advise them appropriately. Council Member Adams recommended that, during one of their first meetings, instructions regarding conflicts of interest be agendized. Assistant City Attorney Clauson indicated that they will be agendizing a section on conflicts of interest, the Brown Act, and other requirements. She added that either she or Deputy City Attorney Ohl will be at the initial meetings. Mr. Kiff stated that the meeting schedule will be discussed at their first meeting, believing that they will initially meet once a month. Further, once they begin reviewing appeals, they may meet less frequently. Mayor Ridgeway believed that they would need to initially meet once or twice a month because they have their own list of issues and also a long list of holdover issues that did not get addressed by the Harbor Committee. Mr. Kiff announced that the Commission's first meeting will be held May 1 at 6:00 p.m. Ms. Clauson added that scheduling meetings for the next year will also be discussed. 2. CITYWIDE PAPER REDUCTION EFFORT. City Clerk Harkless reported that, at the last Council meeting, Council Member Adams requested that this item be agendized for a study session. She indicated that the staff report lists a number of items that the City posts on the website, as well as distributes in hard copy form. Further, information is also posted in Word format on the City's intranet for staff use. Council Member Adams believed that there is a lot of opportunity to reduce the amount of material being distributed. He stated that many people do need hard copies, noting that he would still like to receive the agenda packets in hard copy form; however, there are many people who get hard copies that do not need it. He indicated that staff needs to reevaluate everything they are getting in a recurring basis from the City Clerk's office and determine if they need to get the hard copy every time. He stated that receiving updated Boards, Commissions, and Committees rosters almost every week prompted this idea. He indicated that an email should be sent out with a web address to let people know there is a new version and, if they want a hard copy, they need to request one. He stated that he wants to bring in his copy of the Municipal Code and other binders because he has not kept up with every update, and pointed out the cost of printing the Municipal Code. 11011 �1:1 Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the City Clerk provide a memo, not an email, that includes a list of the documents available on the website and provides the web address. He agreed that the roster should not be distributed. Mayor Pro Tern Bromberg believed that it could be distributed quarterly. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the staff liaison for each of the boards, commissions, and committees could ask them about what they would agree to relative to the reduction of paper. Ms. Harkless reported that she discussed this with some of the Planning and Community Services staff who indicated that some of their members do not have internet access. Volume 55 - Page 118 Paper Reduction Effort (32) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 Ms. Harkless noted that there will be an amendment to the roster because of the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) appointment. Council Member Adams suggested that, when the roster is updated, she send an email to everyone and in the subject line state that there has been a change to the roster. Ms. Harkless clarified that the City is only talking about the internal reduction of paper and not cutting down on the copies that are available to the public. She indicated that they could also add members of the public to an email list. Council Member Adams stated that the public should be asked to participate in this process, believing that they could help reduce the cost of City government by using the internet to access documents. City Manager Bludau asked if Council was satisfied with the copying of the mail. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he does not think there is any other way to do it at this time. 3. JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS AD HOC COMMITTEE: SITING WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY. The City Council joined Telecommunications Committee Member Leslie Daigle and Special Counsel Bill Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker at the conference table. Member Donald Boortz was not in attendance. Assistant City Manager Kiff utilized a PowerPoint presentation and reported that the City has received about seven requests from telecommunication companies who want to place wireless antennas on City facilities. He stated that the Committee, consisting of Council Members Heffernan and Adams, Leslie Daigle, and Donald Boortz, are tasked with updating the cable franchise ordinances, negotiating a new franchise agreement by using a community needs assessment which is now underway, developing a telecommunications or right - of -way ordinance, and generating a City policy and/or ordinance relative to the use of City properties for these uses. He noted that the City is a high use area in terms of communication devices and pointed out that large parts of the City do not get full coverage. Mr. Kiff reported that the new technology, Third Generation (3G) Wireless, means that more data and voice can travel through the air. He stated that City facilities are attractive spots for the telecom providers because it allows them to deal with one property owner and one lease. He indicated that schools, churches, commercial entities, and residential properties can and will do this if the City chooses not to, and pointed out that the income potential is about $24,000 /year per site. He reported that cellular phones are first generation, digital phones are second generation, and 3G is voice and data transmitted across the air up to 2Mbytes1second. Further, 3G allows higher call volumes to support data -like video and photography. He indicated that the user is charged by the amount of data being transmitted, not on how much time they are connected. He explained that, since a person is constantly online with 3G, there are new applications that might go through. He displayed what the antennas might look like and reported that there is a proposal to house wireless devices at the fare station on Irvine Avenue and at the Oasis Senior Center. Volume 55 - Page 119 INDEX Telecommunications Committee/ Wireless Telecommunications Equipment on Public and Private Property/ Council Policy F -24 (69) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 INDEX Mr. Kiff stated that, as antennas are placed throughout communities, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Health have made more pronouncements about their safety, basically stating that one would have to stand in the antenna's beam permanently in order to have a health affect. He explained that ground level power densities are thousands of times less than the limits. Regarding locating them near homes or schools, they indicate that emissions from antennas come from exposure levels on the ground. Mr. Kiff stated that they propose a policy that would require some type of telecom permit for all private and public facilities. He stated that the submittal process would start at the Planning or Public Works Department. He reported that the Police and Fire Departments have noted a number of concerns about telecommunications antennas interfering with existing emergency networks. He stated that they would have an opportunity to review the site and approve the location and/or recommend changes. Following Planning Department review, he reported that the permit would come to the City Manager's office, be treated like income property, the rent would be set based on fair market values, a draft licensing agreement would be prepared, and an item would be placed on Council's agenda for ratification. Regarding the development design standards, Mr. Kiff reported that nothing can be higher than the maximum building height and they would be prohibited in open space and passive zones. He added that there would be a priority for the location and type of structures, the City would require visual compatibility to the surroundings, and all proposals would require a radio frequency (RF) study that may need yearly updates. He stated that private property installations do not need the license, but would still go through the Planning Department and be reviewed by the Police and Fire Departments. He reported that school facilities and residential satellite dishes are exempt. Noting that the Police and Fire Departments will be reviewing this for emergency signal issues, City Manager Bludau asked if this could require that the provider conduct a study to see if interference will occur. Council Member Glover stated that she appreciates what the Committee has done, but strongly recommends that the antennas be placed on private property since there are strong community feelings against them. Council Member Adams noted that today's presentation showed older technology; however, when the Committee received a presentation by one of the telecom companies, they showed 3G installations which were significantly less visually intrusive. He believed that Council needs to realize that, if the City does not site it on public property, it could be placed 10 feet away from public property and the perceived impacts will be the same; however, the City will not be receiving money. Council Member Glover stated that the opposition was concerned about health issues, believing that $24,000 /year is not enough compared to what could come from this. Council Member Adams noted that the revenue could be $24,000 /year per site. In response to Council Member Adams' question, Assistant City Attorney Clauson reported that the Municipal Code does not allow these to be sited on private property. Planning Director Temple noted that they have been sited on apartment and community association auxiliary buildings. Mayor Ridgeway asked if he has a conflict of interest since he is a lessor for an antenna and negotiated the lease. He noted that a lot of information is missing from the report and stated that there is also a ground component that is not incorporated with the antenna. Ms. Clausen indicated that she can make an Volume 55 - Page 120 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 analysis for a later time. INDEX Police Chief McDonell stated that Chief Telecommunications Engineer Gary Gray of the Orange County Sheriffs Department and Senior Telecommunications Engineer Joe Saddler are in the audience and are familiar with the 800 MHz project. He noted that there is almost a mile on Coast Highway that has been blocked out by a cell site and that they are trying to do work - arounds for some of the holes. He expressed concern that, every time a cell site is installed, the Police Department is not able to get reception; however, he reported that they are implementing a wireless local area network (IAN) project that will allow the officers to move data in the field. He noted that the proposed reception sites would be placed primarily on City facilities, but would pose a conflict if there are also cell sites on those facilities. He stated that, although there is Police and Fire review at this stage, he emphasized that it is early for the 800MHz project and added that he would not like to see any of these sites on City facilities because it would be in direct conflict with their communications investments. Council Member Adams asked whether the City has the ability to stop a private property from leasing a site to a cell company that is next to one of the Police Department's facilities so that Police communications is kept in tact. Ms. Clauson stated that this is not included in the review process that has been currently used. Chief McDonell indicated that they have told the Planning Department to not approve cell sites without discussion with the Police Department due to the impacts. Bill Marticorena, Rutan & Tucker, stated that his firm has worked with many South County cities and the Orange County Sheriffs Department in dealing with sitings in the Laguna Niguel area. He indicated that this is a difficult area for local governments because the FCC has preempted radio frequency interference (RF) and asserted jurisdiction without providing any effective mechanism for dealing with real world problems. He believed that cities are in a unique situation since, not withstanding direct interference with essential police and fire communications, they have no ability to stop companies from siting on private property. He reported that a number of cities have refused to accept this and have pushed the issue which resulted in some compromises with the industry. He stated that cities are looking into generating policies because it is their property and they can require that, prior to using public property, the companies work with local police and fire to ensure no RFI. He stated that working with the industry could give the City some ability to negotiate sitings on public and private properties. Further, it gives the City a better chance at dealing with these kinds of problems then if it just tried to legislate. Ms. Temple stated that there are no good provisions in Title 20 that deal with this and added that they are using some relatively antiquated portions of the Code. She indicated that the industry told them that, because the City has not required a conditional use permit and tried to impose a formalized public hearing process, they want to work with the City; however, this might not continue if a good site cannot be located. Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg stated that he attended the meeting in which the park antenna was discussed and indicated that he has never seen anything like it to this day, even the Greenlight discussions. He stated that the public had health concerns and indicated that, when this comes back to Council, he would like to see the science and proof about the health issue. Volume 55 - Page 121 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 INDEX Regarding Mr. Marticorena's previous statements, Mayor Ridgeway clarified that the City can only control public property if it is in the City's proprietary role, not legislatively. He asked if the City can limit the installation of the facilities to only public properties in order to have some degree of control. Council Member Heffernan stated that he chairs the Committee and that they have been addressing a number of the issues being discussed today. He pointed out that the City does not currently have a policy regarding antennas and devices in the City's right -of -ways. He stated that today's meeting is a result of AT &T approaching the City about their 3G phones which are to come out at the end of the year, regardless if it is on City property or private property. He noted that he has three different cellular phone services because the City has many dead zones in which he cannot phone out. He stated that an advantage the City has in being a public property owner is that it can canvas the community. He questioned whether a city has more clout with a cellular provider because of the broad range of property sites it has rather than doing nothing which will result in a direct conflict with police and emergency services. He emphasized that 3G technology will be applicable in the City but the question is whether the City will have a policy to deal with it. Mayor Ridgeway believed that the 800MHz system needs to be looked at in light of modern technology and asked if it is now obsolete. Committee Member Daigle stated that the cell phone companies have a lot of location choices and, if the City hopes to draw carriers to City properties, it needs to think about terms that are competitive with other landlords in the marketplace. She agreed that this is a consumer driven technology, reporting that there are 120 million consumers in the United States. Further, the use patterns of each subscriber is changing which means there is a need for more network. She stated that it is her understanding that the footprint of the installation is being done so it is less visually intrusive; however, there are now more sites. She indicated that Council has to decide if they want to lease City properties. She reported that carriers are working cooperatively with the County on interference issues and stated that counsel has been helpful with jurisdictional issues. She utilized photographs which highlight new installation sites and suggested that the City also have a streetlight agreement if it desires to enter into leases with carriers. Mr. Kiff noted that Southern California Edison owns a number of streetlights in the City and that carriers can install these onto them without the City's permission. Gary Gray, Chief Telecommunications Engineer for the Orange County Sheriffs Department, stated that he is a radio engineer and not a health specialist. However, signal levels have to be within bounds and not exceed any standards, regardless if it is for equipment or one of the wireless carriers. He stated that, because of this, safety is not an issue. He agreed that there are some interference issues with the 800MHz carriers in the area (Nextel, Verizon, and AT &T Wireless). He indicated that they do not have interference at every site every time, but it depends on the frequency the carrier is using at that time since the wireless carriers constantly change frequencies. He reported that the FCC promulgated a 'Best Practices Guide" which states that the wireless carriers and public safety entities should conduct advanced planning together. He stated that there are some bands in which they do not receive interference because they are on a different radio frequency; however, their planning staff is encouraging co- location at different facilities and, for economic reasons, they have even rented space to their competitors. He noted that, even though one Volume 55 - Page 122 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 INDEX start up with no interference, their next customer could bring it. In response to Council questions, Mr. Gray stated that the 800MHz and wireless communications are incompatible to a certain extent, adding that when the FCC allotted the frequencies they probably did not see the explosion in technology and acceptance by the general public. He noted that public safety entities, the government, and the military have been using wireless communications for many years. He reported that Nextel has made a proposal to change the frequencies so that public safety entities were in a separate area from wireless carriers. He stated that there have been several counter proposals to this. He noted that the FCC has a formal docket proceeding to figure out what to do with public safety and added that they have acknowledged that there is a problem. Council Member Adams asked if 3G will have the same interference problems as the current technology. Mr. Gray indicated that they do not have experience with it yet, but there may be less impact. Council Member Adams stated that the industry told the Committee that they do not expect to do many new sitings for old generation technology. He indicated that the Police Department may want to look into 3G technology for their communications system, believing this would take away the conflict issue. Mr. Gray noted that some of the 3G technology may take place on 800MHz frequencies, adding that there is a difference in the way the public safety systems are put together versus the commercial systems. He noted that the Sheriffs Department has about 25 sites while each carrier has 150 sites within the County and are building more. He emphasized that the County cannot afford that many sites and pointed out that the carriers' sites pay for themselves. He stated that, in the meantime, they try to meet with the carriers to resolve the differences. He indicated that there is a potential for using the carriers' poles at a cost of several hundred thousand dollars worth of equipment per site which includes the building of the structure and the radio hardware /antennas. He confirmed that today's technology is not able to co -use the carriers' equipment; however, a dedicated signal for public safety could be done if the FCC allowed it. He indicated that, next time they upgrade the radio system, it may be possible to have a large amount of spectrum with a certain part of it being dedicated to public safety. He stated that there is no priority when determining what system gets repaired first if there is a major outage. Mayor Ridgeway believed that public safety and cities should be lobbying the federal government to allow a spectrum for public safety. Mr. Gray indicated that the public safety agencies have been working closely with the FCC in the development of the Best Practices Guide. Further, as an interim step, the public safety community is nationally taking a very active role in developing a response to the restructuring of the frequencies. Council Member Adams requested that the cameras show the exhibits that were utilized, noting that one of the examples was of a streetlight pole. He emphasized that, if the City does not offer its sites, Edison and others that control the streetlight poles will and will receive the revenue. He noted that the City controls the traffic signal poles and suggested looking into placing the devices atop the poles since it would be less intrusive. Council Member Glover believed this was premature. Council Member Adams reported that there is not a lot of time since AT &T has basically said they have to get the 3G technology operational by the end of the year and needs to know if the City is interested. Mayor Ridgeway indicated that the City may need to generate more information Volume 55 - Page 123 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes April 23, 2002 IICI11�/:1 about the latest safety science. He believed that the industry has vi; improved the antennas and stated that the City needs to establish a policy. Mr. Kiff believed that Council wants the proposed policy to focus on private property and discuss steps and priorities for how structures would be placed. He stated that this could be brought to Council during a regular meeting. He indicated that using City facilities would involve more discussion. He reported that AT &T was invited to the study session about three times and believed that they should attend a meeting to show what the antennas look like and exactly where the cellular sites are located. Council Member Glover indicated that she does not support showing where the sites are throughout the community. Mayor Ridgeway stated that the policy should include City facilities because the City has a degree of control over it in a proprietary role. Mayor Pro Tem Bromberg stated that the safety issue should also be a part of the study. Council Member Heffernan requested direction, noting that it is not 1996 or the same time as when this fast was addressed. He emphasized that half the people in the City have cell phones and believed that it is a disservice to the community not to address this issue since it will be addressed in the private sector. He stated that there is a huge amount of money involved and that the reason this is being addressed is because it has not been addressed for a while. Ms. Clauson stated that the two components to this are the telecommunications ordinance and a policy for use of City property. She stated that staff can bring both issues back for separate action. Council Member Proctor believed that the policy and whether the City should be involved in the business should be addressed together. PUBLIC COMMENTS — None. ADJOURNMENT — 5:40 p.m The agenda for the Study Session was posted on April 17, 2002, at 12:15 p.m on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. a- W6�' '� 4wp Recording Secretary �J - Mayor City Clerk POOL Volume 55 - Page 124