Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIVa_Draft Minutes of October 2, 2024Attachment No. 1 Draft minutes of October 2, 2024 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES COMMUNITY ROOM – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE October 2, 2024 REGULAR MEETING – 5 P.M. I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER – 5:00 p.m. II. WELCOME AND ROLL CALL Staff: Planning Manager Ben Zdeba Committee Members: Co-Chair Arlene Greer, Nicholas Acevedo, Dennis Baker, Curtis Black, James Carlson, Susan DeSantis, Virginia Anders-Ellmore, Laird Hayes, Charles Klobe, Ruth Kobayashi, Scott Laidlaw, Katie Love, Jim Mosher, Robert Rader, Nancy Scarbrough, Amber Snider, Paul Watkins, and Lori Williams Absent: Lynn Hackman and Anthony Maniscalchi Excused: Annie Clougherty, Co-Chair Jeremy Evans, David Guder, Thomas Meng, Maxwell Pearson, Debbie Stevens, and Christy Walker III. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS – GPUSC Chair Nancy Gardner announced that Tony Petros will attend the November GPAC meeting to discuss Complete Streets. IV. CURRENT BUSINESS a. Meeting Minutes of September 4, 2024 Motion made by Committee Member Mosher and seconded by Committee Member Baker to approve the meeting minutes of September 4, 2024, with Committee Member Mosher’s edits. With Co-Chair Greer abstaining, the motion carried unanimously. b. Update from City Council Meeting of September 24, 2024 Planning Manager Zdeba first noted that Dudek and Kearns & West are not attending this meeting to help this effort stay on budget. He provided an update from the City Council meeting of September 24, 2024. He relayed that the City Council took action to amend the Housing Element to revise the language for the Charter Section 423 vote, conducted second readings on ordinances to implement overlays and objective design standards for multi-unit residential projects effective end of October, and stated that this will enable the City to have a compliant rezoning program. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 2 of 6 He noted that the City is waiting for a second incomplete notice from the Coastal Commission for the complementary amendments to the Local Coastal Program. Planning Manager Zdeba announced new GPAC members and indicated there are two more vacancies that will be addressed at the next General Plan Update Steering Committee (GPUSC) meeting. Furthermore, he stated that the Council is willing to consider additional Noise Element work, staff is working to get the scope of work from Dudek, and the Noise Subcommittee will convene to review it. In reply to Committee Member Klobe’s inquiry, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that State law has removed the opportunity for local government agencies to apply subjective design standards to residential projects. The Objective Design Standards are intended to provide Developers with certainty while giving the City the ability to ensure projects meet design expectations and fit in with the character of Newport Beach. In reply to Committee Member DeSantis’ inquiry, Planning Manager Zdeba reviewed the communications with State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) related to the Housing Element amendments and agreed it would be necessary to assess the housing legislation signed by the Governor, including Builder’s Remedy. In response to Committee Member Mosher’s questions, Planning Manager Zdeba noted the referenced legislative changes are recent and that there are other laws involved that may affect the maximum allowable density under the General Plan. In response to Committee Member Anders-Ellmore, Planning Manager Zdeba expressed the opinion that developers will pursue projects until the market is over-saturated. He did not know the apartment vacancy rates in town, but thought it was probably lower than in most areas. In reply to Committee Member Klobe’s question, Planning Manager Zdeba did not know the number of building permits issued from the units entitled in the Airport Area over the last few years and again recognized private market factors impacting development. Committee Member Laidlaw stated that there is not sufficient data on residential vacancy rates. c. Vision Statement Updated Draft At the September 4, 2024, regular meeting, the GPAC voted to allow Dudek and City staff to revise the draft Vision Statement and to bring it back for the GPAC’s review. Since the meeting, Dudek and City staff coordinated on responsive updates and Attachment 2 included the updated draft. Recommended Actions: 1- Receive an overview from City staff; 2- Provide any feedback on the updated draft Vision Statement; and 3- Received and file Attachment 2, along with incorporating any feedback, as the final draft. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 3 of 6 Planning Manager Zdeba noted that Subcommittee Chair Debbie Stevens could not attend this meeting, but she supported the Vision Statement draft and the draft’s readiness for community feedback. He added that other written comments were received on the Vision Statement draft. He noted that staff sought GPAC’s approval to receive and file Attachment 2 so the Vision Statement draft could begin to be shared with public for input. In reply to Committee Member Kobayashi’s questions, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that comments on the Vision Statement can still be made. She read into the record suggestions in Section 2.3, Section 2.4, Section 4, Section 4.2, Section 5, Section C, Section 6.4, Section 7 and 7.1. In reply, GPUSC Chair Gardner questioned if the phrase “equitable access” helps the City satisfy its environmental justice responsibilities. In reply to the mentioning of tribes, Planning Manager Zdeba thought that some people may have been unaware of the tribal foundations and history in Newport Beach. He added that the City regularly gets inquiries from two tribal nations. However, he assured it would be okay to remove “tribal” from the Vision Statement. Committee Member DeSantis asked for further discussion regarding the guiding principle for conflicts as part of the Vision Statement draft. Dialogue took place regarding an approach for additional discussion, and it was suggested that substantial changes be discussed during the GPAC meeting this evening and before public outreach. In reply to Committee Member Mosher’s question, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that the City Council will ultimately decide the appropriateness of the Vision Statement when the General Plan Update is considered for adoption. Committee Member Mosher expressed concern for the comprehensiveness of the Vision Statement and suggested additional work by the Vision Statement Subcommittee. In reply to GPUSC Chair Gardner’s inquiry of whether the Vision Statement should be reviewed by the Subcommittee before public feedback is solicited, the GPAC deliberated on the matter and concerns were expressed for revision opportunities, keeping up with changes over time, and how the Vision Statement will be presented to the public. Committee Member Laidlaw suggested a change in the last sentence of the first paragraph to which Planning Manager Zdeba noted the change had already been made despite the version shared. A Motion was made by Committee Member Laidlaw to include the revision, and all other comments received at the meeting be considered later. There was no second, and instead a Substitute Motion by Committee Member Klobe to send the comments back to the Vision Statement Subcommittee for consideration and a recommendation to the full body and was seconded by Committee Member Baker. The GPAC expressed concern for the impact revisiting the Vision Statement could have on the timeline. Planning Manager Zdeba noted the potential for delay, recounted the original support for the Vision Statement at the September GPAC meeting, but emphasized that he is a public servant and will honor the direction desired by the GPAC. In reply to Committee Member Mosher’s comment, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that the critical path is that if the GPAC is comfortable with the workshop dates and moving forward with planning and advertising, content does not need be shared ahead of time, and the revised Vision Statement can come back in November. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 4 of 6 Committee Member Black supported the Vision Statement Subcommittee meeting before the workshop dates. Planning Manager Zdeba indicated that although staff can incorporate all the comments, the Subcommittee can meet and return to the November GPAC meeting with a more complete draft. He noted a complete redrafting will have an impact on the schedule and budget. The Substitute Motion passed with Committee Member Rader voting no. d. Upcoming Workshops: Draft General Plan Goal and Policy Topics At the September 4, 2024, regular meeting, the GPAC received and filed the Phase Two Outreach Plan. Attachment 3 provided an update on the workshop plans and draft Goal and Policy topics to share with the community for input. Recommended Actions: 1- Receive an overview from City staff; 2- Provide any feedback on the effort; and 3- Conduct a vote to take either of the following two actions: a. Receive and file Attachment 3 to allow Dudek and Kearns & West to proceed with revisions to create a final version for release for public review at the workshops; or b. Direct the responsible subcommittees to review the drafts for additional input prior to release for public review at the workshops. Planning Manager Zdeba used a presentation to share the recommended workshop topics and dates and reviewed an advertising plan. GPUSC Chair Gardner suggested the workshops be located at a geographically neutral location. In reply, Planning Manager Zdeba assured that every attempt would be made to keep meetings at City Hall. He reviewed potential meeting spots and continued with the presentation to review possible workshop formats. In reply to Committee Member Scarbrough’s inquiry, Planning Manager Zdeba clarified that every workshop will include the Vision Statement. Planning Manager Zdeba relayed that the workshop topics are based on comments collected in Phase One and translated into a goal for consideration and the policy action idea is how the goal might be achieved. He used the presentation to review the process for connecting the General Plan development and outreach, an overview, and a goal topic and policy action idea for each subject area. Committee Member Watkins suggested softening the language in the Recreation and Natural Resources Element and expressed confusion for the timing of the revisions and strict messaging. In reply, GPUSC Chair Gardner suggested the workshops present an idea and ask for public input. Committee Member Kobayashi affirmed Committee Member Watkins comments on the document. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 5 of 6 Committee Member Baker supported having a member of the staff at each workshop station. Planning Manager Zdeba clarified that the intention of the document is to elicit feedback and thought softening the language is a topic to window with the community at workshops. In reply to Committee Member Scarbrough’s inquiry on how the schedule of the workshops coordinate with stakeholders like community organizations and associations, Planning Manager Zdeba reviewed the order of the outreach timeline. In reply to Committee Anders-Ellmore’s concern for substantial subject matter discussions, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that there would be qualified representation at each workshop. Committee Member DeSantis noted that background reports from the consultant are posted on the Newport, Together website. In reply to her request to preview the Land Use workshop outline, Planning Manager Zdeba stated that it is not ready, and he hopes to meet with the Land Use Subcommittee before the November meeting. In reply to Committee Member Kobayashi’s question, Planning Manger Zdeba stated that the Recreation and Natural Resources draft was prepared by the consultant and reviewed by staff. In reply to Committee Member Scarbrough’s request to review the calendar at each GPAC meeting, Planning Manager Zdeba noted he’ll be presenting the calendar later in the meeting and reviewed the timeline. In reply to Committee Member Laidlaw, Planning Manager Zdeba confirmed that the drafts have not been reviewed by the Subcommittees. Committee Member Laidlaw noted the two recommended options for action. Committee Member Black thought committee feedback at this stage does not require additional review before public feedback and the goal topic areas are broad, and he supports moving forward as long as opportunities exist for the GPAC to provide feedback to the Subcommittee later. Committee Member Mosher thought there was merit for the individual Subcommittees to review the goal topics, so they are sure they are getting the desired input and, in reply to his inquiry, Planning Manager Zdeba relayed the intention to share the topics at the workshop in real time to collect high level feedback. Committee Member DeSantis supported Committee Member Black’s comments, and in reply to her question, Planning Manager Zdeba noted that the GPAC is part of the community and welcome to participate in the workshops. In response to Committee Member Scarbrough’s concern for workshop participation and input, Planning Manager Zdeba relayed a multi-pronged approach. GPUSC Chair Gardner provided perspective on workshop attendance and noted the attention on the matter that will come from the Council and online exposure. General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 6 of 6 Committee Member Baker advocated for presenting the goal topics in real time to stimulate discussion during the workshop and mitigate his concern for community members attending with an agenda. A Motion was made by Committee Member Klobe and seconded by Committee Member Baker to move the staff recommendation 3(b) to direct the responsible subcommittees to review the drafts for additional input prior to release for public review at the workshops. Co-Chair Greer offered an amendment to the motion to include Committee Member Watkins’ comments. The Motion passed with Committee Members Black, Williams, and DeSantis voting no. e. Presentation: Overview of Upcoming Deliverables and Objectives Planning Manager Zdeba used a presentation to share the draft General Plan timeline that will be sent out to the GPAC, noted additional potential GPAC meetings, and recapped additional subcommittee meetings in October and next steps for outreach and General Plan development. Co-Chair Greer asked GPAC members to submit their comments early so everyone has an opportunity to review it in advance of the meeting. V. COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM) – Committee Member Black announced a meeting next Wednesday with the Harbor Commission where he intended to provide a General Plan overview and all the goals and policies that involve the Harbor Commission and solicit feedback. Additionally, he stated that the Water Quality Coastal Tidelands will be reviewed during tomorrow’s Water Quality committee meeting. He suggested a future agenda item to receive an overview of raw outreach data. GPUSC Chair Gardner noted that questions for Tony Petros can be directed to her after she shares with the GPAC his talking points for the upcoming presentation. In reply to Committee Members Laidlaw and Scarbrough, Planning Manager Zdeba confirmed that the workshop dates were part of the motion, times will be in the evening, the subcommittees will be notified of the dates and times, and a meeting recap will be sent out to the GPAC tomorrow. VI. ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, Co-Chair Greer adjourned the meeting.