Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIV(c)_Additional Materials Received_MosherSeptember 4, 2024, GPAC Agenda Item IV.c Comments The following comments on items on the Newport Beach General Plan Advisory Committee agenda are submitted by: Jim Mosher (jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item IV.c. Phase Two Outreach Plan My understanding of the enabling resolutions of the GPUSC and the GPAC, is that the GPAC exists to ensure that there will be at least some citizens providing input to the General Update proposals, while creating and overseeing the larger public outreach effort is one of the core responsibilities of the GPUSC. Nonetheless, the GPUSC seems to have delegated oversight of the public outreach process to the GPAC. So I have these comments reading the consultant’s draft plan. Page 3, Section 1.1: The Introduction to the draft plan makes a partially incorrect statement at the end of the first paragraph when it says “Currently, the City is actively processing amendments to the Land Use and Noise Elements to implement several housing policy actions identified in the certified Housing Element.” My understanding is City staff’s proposed changes to the Land Use Element are being “actively processed” and are expected to be adopted by the City Council on September 24, concurrent with its adoption of last-minute staff-recommended amendments to the Housing Element deleting references to the need for a Charter Section 423 (Greenlight) vote. However, the changes to the Noise Element related to Housing Element policy actions are not still being “pursued.” That process was completed nearly a year ago, on November 14, 2023, when, without any input from or review by the GPAC, the Council adopted the staff-recommended revisions to the Noise Element (and related changes to the Land Use Element) with Resolution No. 2023-72. Similarly, the statement on page 13, at the end of the first paragraph of Section 3 (Community Engagement Timeline) that “The Noise Element is currently in the amendment process” is incorrect if that is referring to amendments implementing the Housing Element. That process was completed by adoption of Resolution No. 2023-72. Page 6: Of the four bullet points describing tasks related to the “unique role” of the GPAC Outreach Subcommittee, the only one that comports with its creation as an ad hoc subcommittee that can meet without formal public notice and agendas, is the second: “Recommending the Community Engagement and Outreach Plan for consideration and acceptance by the full GPAC.” I believe that if it is being used to “adjust outreach and engagement strategies as needed,” the intent to make those adjustments needs to be publicly noticed and executed. Page 7: In Figure 3, what is the meaning of the airplane inside the “No” symbol? Does this mean the consultant regards aircraft-related issues as being an example of a topic for which outreach would be a waste of resources because it affects few people and the result would have little impact? Page 7: In the opening paragraph of Section 1.5 (Demographic Snapshot), it is unclear how the consultant arrived at the figure of “86,694” for the population of Newport Beach at the time of the 2020 Census. The number does not appear on the Census Bureau “Quick Facts” page cited, which says: “Population, Census, April 1, 2020 … 85,239” (which is only 53 persons more than General Plan Advisory Committee - September 4, 2024 IV.c - Additional Materials Received September 4, 2024, GPAC agenda Item IV.c comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2 the April 1, 2010, Census number of 85,186).1 The “Quick Facts” page also gives the population estimate for July 1, 2023, as 82,637, a 3% decline from the 2020 Census result. The other demographic information given is similarly difficult to correlate with the sources cited. One statistic I previously asked about, but which seems to remain unanswered, is the characteristics of tenancy within the city: how long do people live here? how many residents are new each year? and so on. Page 9: In Table 1 (Stakeholder Identification Types), under “Building and Development,” I don’t recognize any of the examples as “realtors.” I also don’t know what “Newport Equities” is. A website using that name connects to something called the “Province Group,” which seems to be (like several of the others listed) a real estate development/investment firm with an office in Newport Center. The only Newport Beach project they list is the Sailhouse residential development in Corona del Mar, which appears to have been built in around 2001 under the name “John Laing Homes.” As a general comment, the choices appearing in the “Example Organizations” lists are a little hard to understand. Some seem truly “examples” where many others could be named, while others appear to be attempts to be exhaustive. Is the consultant soliciting additional names? What outreach is planned for these? Who will be invited to the “intimate virtual interviews” described on page 21? Will those not invited be contacted? Page 13: Under Section 3 (Community Engagement Timeline), I appreciate Figure 4 is confined to listing engagement activities. Nonetheless, “Phase 2,” running from Spring 2024 to Spring 2025 is labeled “Policy Development and General Plan Amendment,” which implies that while the indicated outreach is going on, the GPAC will be working on and completing those aspects of the GPU. We are already near the end of Summer 2024, and Spring 2025 is not so far off. As I indicated in my separate comments on page 30 of the 41-page Attachment 2 to Item IV.b, is it possible to make public a detailed timeline of what staff and the consultants expect the GPAC and its subcommittees to be doing during this time, so they will be able to successfully complete their task of recommending amendments by the end of Phase 2? Page 14: In Table 2 (Notification Methods), a mailer provided as a water bill insert is only going to reach addresses receiving water from the City, and even then, only those who elect to be billed by mail. The City Manager’s weekly newsletter is not currently a mailed product, but rather something posted electronically. The City does, however, have a capability to send postcards (or other material) to all mailboxes, and has done so in the past. 1 What seems to be an alternative Census Bureau profile for Newport Beach quotes the same “85,239” figure for the 2020 Census. Curiously, the City’s Population By Year webpage agrees with the 2010 Census number, but gives “85,780” as the 2020 Census result. General Plan Advisory Committee - September 4, 2024 IV.c - Additional Materials Received