Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes_01-10-2024Page 1 of 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES COMMUNITY ROOM – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE JANUARY 10, 2024 REGULAR MEETING – 5 P.M. I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER – 5:01 p.m. II. WELCOME AND ROLL CALL Present: Co-Chair Jeremy Evans, Nicholas Acevedo, Dennis Baker, Curtis Black, James Carlson, Jeff Cefalia, Susan DeSantis, David Guder, Charles Klobe, Ruth Kobayashi, Scott Laidlaw, Katie Love, Anthony Maniscalchi, Jim Mosher, Maxwell Pearson, Robert Rader, Harrison Rolfes, Nancy Scarbrough, Amber Snider, Debbie Stevens, Paul Watkins, Lori Williams Staff: Acting Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murrillo and Principal Planner Ben Zdeba Excused: Matthew Brady, Annie Clougherty, Co-Chair Arlene Greer, Laird Hayes, Thomas Meng Absent: Lynn Hackman, Graham Wahlberg, Christy Walker III. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Virginia Anders-Elmore stated being impressed by the information in the packet and stressed the importance of sea level rise. Philip Bettencourt noted a new study committee formed by the City Council to study transportation issues and questioned if it will advance or contribute to the General Plan process. Nancy Scarbrough announced that Katie Eng will be speaking about emergency planning resiliency relative to natural disasters tomorrow in the Friends Room at 7:30 p.m. IV. CURRENT BUSINESS a. Meeting Minutes of December 6, 2023 Motion made by Charles Klobe and seconded by Dennis Baker with Mr. Mosher’s edits. The motion carried unanimously with all in favor. b. General Plan Update Committee Procedures and Outreach Discussion General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting January 10, 2024 Based on the feedback received at the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) meeting on December 6, 2023, City staff prepared a memo to outline suggested procedures for the GPAC, including four key recommendations to promote more effective engagement and use of the GPAC’s time and effort. In addition, Dudek and Kearns & West worked alongside City staff to create and launch the online engagement platform through Social Pinpoint that will continually evolve over time. The website will initially serve as both a way for those interested in the General Plan Update to formally keep updated, as well as a repository of documents and information related to the update. Part of the initial efforts will be pop-up events to begin getting the word out to the community regarding the update. Recommended Actions: 1- Review, discuss, provide feedback on the recommendations, and if the GPAC concurs with the recommendation, then receive and file. 2- If appropriate, consider identifying a chairperson for each GPAC Subcommittees or direct staff to work with each subcommittee directly to identify this person and to report back the selection at a future meeting; and 3- Provide feedback on the commencement of the outreach and engagement efforts, including but not limited to pop-up events and review of the website. Nancy Gardner, Chair of the General Plan Update Steering Committee (GPUSC), introduced the item, as the GPUSC reviewed the proposed procedures at their December 20, 2023, meeting and concurred with the recommendations therein. She proposed that the element committees be the work horses and the whole Committee will have an opportunity to comment. Co-Chair Evans stated that the proposal includes assigning a chairperson to each subcommittee to report back to the full GPAC. He referenced a slide to show the proposed process for GPAC feedback. Dennis Baker thought it is appropriate for the GPAC to be able to ask for guidance from staff and not direct them. He supported having a chairperson for each subcommittee but expressed concern for delegation measures and suggested guidelines for Brown Act compliance and workflow management. Curtis Black thought the proposed process was a great change and addressed the concerns. Principal Planner Zdeba reviewed the additional recommended actions. Charles Klobe and Curtis Black suggested having the individual subcommittees select a chairperson for greater efficiency. Dennis Baker suggested the same person cannot chair more than one subcommittee. Debbie Stevens concurred a chairperson should be selected by the subcommittee. Jenna Tourje-Maldonado of Kearns & West reviewed the next steps for outreach and engagement, GPAC feedback loop, and questionnaire for event type priorities. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting January 10, 2024 In response to Nancy Scarbrough’s question, Jenna Tourje-Maldonado stated she will return with the number of pop-up events planned. Ms. Scarbrough suggested the subcommittees provide a list of things they think require input. Jenna Tourje-Maldonado continued the slide show to share the questionnaire results and next steps. In reply to Susan DeSantis’ inquiry, Jenna Tourje-Maldonado stated that digital and in-person activity responses can be considered, and the Social Pinpoint website will be used and aligned with the steps in the planning process. Scott Laidlaw suggested collecting feedback from organizations. Dennis Baker suggested being specific about organizational events. In response to Charles Klobe’s question, Principal Planner Zdeba indicated that information on the November election will be shared organically, but no outreach is directly tied to it. Mr. Klobe suggested Committee members be prepared with information to help enlighten people in their organizational connections. Principal Planner Zdeba offered to supply factual information on the Housing Element’s implementation process. An unidentified speaker suggested including public/private meetings as an opportunity for outreach, i.e., homeowner associations and Rotary Club. Jenna Tourje-Maldonado noted challenges participating in events hosted by private organizations. Jenna Tourje-Maldonado continued with the presentation to review the General Plan website updates since the December GPAC meeting and next steps. In response to Katie Love’s inquiry, Principal Planner Zdeba stated he will provide the scoped number of meetings for prioritizing activities and anticipated the full Committee reviewing the list. An unidentified speaker complimented the website update, affirmed the frequently asked questions (FAQ) section, and suggested the FAQs be moved up higher and the GPAC members be informed so they can be good ambassadors. Dennis Baker suggested engaging the school districts and high school civics teachers to reach the student population. Curtis Black suggested including a short and broad survey on the website. c. Presentation: Overview of Upcoming Deliverables and Objectives Dudek and Kearns & West shared more information about upcoming deliverables, including the existing conditions and background analyses reports, and provided guidance on objectives for the subcommittees and GPAC regarding each deliverable. The presentation also touched on the overall General Plan Update schedule. Elizabeth Dickson of Dudek utilized a presentation to review the project timeline and key deliverables. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting January 10, 2024 In response to Charles Klobe’s question, Principal Planner Zdeba stated that the diagnostic memo will be more robust and comprehensive and will be prepared by Dudek, who has access to the original one included in the request for proposal (RFP). In response to Nancy Scarbrough’s question, Ms. Dickson indicated that the City Council will have an opportunity to review and approve the plan in Summer 2025 with the hearings and final plan. In response to Susan DeSantis’ question, Ms. Dickson relayed that there is a process for subcommittee review. Ms. Dickson continued the presentation to review the purpose and importance of the background analysis. In response to an unidentified and inaudible speaker, Ms. Dickson stated that Dudek is looking especially at Newport Beach and available data from the City or publicly available based on best practices. In response to Dennis Baker’s questions, Ms. Dickson relayed the process for informing the goal and policy development. In reply to Susan DeSantis’ question, Ms. Dickson confirmed that the technical report could potentially be augmented from subcommittee and GPAC input in coordination with City staff. Ms. Dickson continued with the presentation to review the proposed process for GPAC feedback. In response to Dennis Baker’s question, Ms. Dickson relayed that the feedback process will be like a loop if the full Committee recommends the subcommittee do more. In response to Nancy Scarbrough’s question, Principal Planner Zdeba noted that a general summary will be prepared from the subcommittee meetings and actions reported out. Susan DeSantis noted the Chat Box feature on Zoom for note taking. In response to Scott Laidlaw’s request for draft document examples, Ms. Dickson indicated that the vision and resiliency analysis will be shared with the respective subcommittees and reviewed the reasons why these two reports are anomalies. In reply to Nancy Scarbrough’s question, Ms. Dickson confirmed that the resiliency topic is incorporated in various elements. Ms. Dickson continued with the presentation to explain the pathway to engagement and connection to the General Plan Update process. In response to Dennis Baker’s question, Ms. Dickson clarified engagement approaches based on the group type. Ms. Dickson continued with the presentation to review the next steps. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting January 10, 2024 In response to Nancy Gardner’s suggestion, Ms. Dickson concurred that natural resources seemed sensible for the resiliency topic. In response to Susan DeSantis’ question, Principal Planner Zdeba stated that although a portal for the GPAC to review analysis is not available now, they can be posted on the City’s website as a repository without advertising it to avoid wide distribution. Curtis Black concurred with the approach. Paul Watkins asked a question that was inaudible and received a “yes” response from Principal Planner Zdeba. In response to Susan DeSantis’ inquiry, Principal Planner Zdeba noted that a planned Study Session will take place on February 13 to review the implementation program for the Housing Element and it will be publicly available and recorded. In response Jim Mosher’s questions, Ms. Dickson reviewed the timeline for the vision statement development, stated that it should guide the goal and policies overall with room for revisions, and noted the General Plan amendment will not be done until it is adopted. She relayed an opportunity to review and revise the subcommittee structure and noted that while there are examples of online General Plans, there has been no determination of which one the City is modeling. She offered to share examples of web plans. The item was a presentation, and no action was taken. d. Reviewing 2023, and Setting Expectations for 2024 As this is the first GPAC meeting of 2024, the GPAC was encouraged to reflect on 2023, and to set expectations for the General Plan Update in 2024. The recommended action was to have a discussion and provide feedback as appropriate. In response to Curtis Black’s question, Principal Planner Zdeba relayed that staff will begin to reach out by email to individual subcommittees to schedule meetings pending the GPAC’s endorsement of the new process reset. Co-Chair Evans concurred with Paul Watkins’ inaudible comments. V. COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM) None VI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Co-Chair Evans adjourned the meeting at 6:19 p.m. until February 7.