Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/01/2007 - PB&R CommissionMAY 1, 2007 APPROVED PB &R COMMISSION MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Convened 7:02pm ROLL CALL Present: Debra Allen Tim Brown Bill Garrett Phillip Lugar Marie Marston Cristine Trapp Absent Greg Ruzicka Staff: Wes Morgan, RSS Director Mark Harmon, General Services Director Dan Sereno, Parks 8 Tree Superintendent Teri Craig, Admin Asst Commissioner Brown stated that he was proud to have attended the District X CPRS Awards Ceremony where the Recreation Et Seniors Services Department were recognized for several awards. The Commission congratulated the Department. Superintendent Sereno introduced Tony Uno from West Coast Arborists who provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Commission. Commissioner Allen complimented West Coast Arborists for their tree trimming. DIRECTOR COMMENTS Director Harmon updated the Commission regarding the CdM sand project; i.e. cleaning and dredging. He stated that when the first load of sand was dropped staff believed that it looked great but after the winds came and took off a couple of inches of sand it left with nothing but shells so staff has had to run the beach cleaner pretty much everyday since then and is coming out real nice and in about a week the volleyball court would be replaced and everything would be in place for the summer. Director Morgan stated that the CPRS Agency Award that the Department won was out of about 50 cities and that it does not happen very often and thanked Teri Craig, Sonia Villavazo, Matt Lohr and Sean Levin , noting that these people are the reason why the Department was given the award. He went on to say that at the May City Council Study Session the budget proposals will be reviewed in terms of its economics, i.e. reserves, supplemental requests and then at the May 22nd Study Session individual department presentations would be made. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ron Hendrickson stated that he had the following comments in the interest of having the General Plan depict City parks as correctly as possible: 1. l think Table Rl, Pg 8 -10 ofthe G.P. is somewhat misleading in that it leaves the impression we have a deficit of 38.8 acres ofpark. No mention is made of future designated parks, one of which, Coastal Peak park is under construction. Sunset Ridge Park area is now owned by the City. The future parks would make up the deficit. Table Rl indicates 50 acres of park needed for Newport Coast, but assigns it no park acreage. A footnote indicates there are 58.1 acres of private parks. What is Parks, Beaches it Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 2 really difficult for me to understand is why the 240 acres of Crystal Cove State Park on the ocean side of PCH, which is within the city limits of N8, is not counted in our park acreage. Granted it is managed by the State, but it is for our citizens, particularly those who live in the Newport Coast. Shouldn't this acreage be added to our park inventory to truthfully reflect what we really have. 2. Another concern J have is that the CDM Park Service Area shows a shortage 9.1 acres. Harbor View Park Service Area to the north shows a surplus of 27.3 acres. The line of demarcation between these 2 park service areas is drawn along 51h Ave., and Grant Howald park, which really serves CDM is on the north side of51h Ave., putting this park in the Harbor View Service Area, and therefore fictitiously indicating a shortage in CDM. The Councilmonic District line between Districts 6 (CDM) and District 7 (Harbor View) includes Grant Howald Park in CDM. Therefore, it would appear logical to adjust the Park Service boundaries to more correctly reflect the situation, and let CDM know that they really don't have a park shortage. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Item pulled by Commissioner Allen 2. Park and Operations Division Activity Report. Receive /file monthly Activity Report for activities and upcoming projects. 3. Recreation It Senior Services Activity Report. Receive /file monthly Activity Report for activities and upcoming projects. 4. Item pulled by Commissioner Lugar 5. Tree Donation. Approve donation by Howald Hall, SPON of one 36" box Melaleuca linariifolia tree to be located at Bonita Canyon Sports Park. 6. Tree Donation. Approve donation by Ward Mace, of one 36" box Black Oak tree to be located at Castaways Park. Motion by Commissioner Brown to accept items 2, 3, 5 li 6 of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by acclamation. Minutes of the April 3, 2007 regular meeting. Commissioner Allen stated that the word Commissioner should be changed to Commission in her statement regarding recusing herself from the Newport Center Park discussion. Motion by Commissioner Allen to approve the minutes of April 3, 2007 as amended. Motion carried by acclamation. 4. Reforestation Request. Commissioner Lugar stated that he did not feel that this item should be approved based on the photographs received as it does not appear to have any damage or repeated requests for repair but believes there is someone from the audience that would like to speak on the issue. Chair Garrett opened the public discussion Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 3 Jan Vandersloot stated that there was a big brouhaha on Larkspur a couple of years ago where there were problems with how the reforestation petitions and the process was carried out. He stated that when he look at this request it did not appear that the process was being carried out correctly regarding having 60% of the homeowners signing the petitions. He stated he was concerned that the process had not been followed and commented that the numbers on the buildings do not correspond to the petition. Chair Garrett closed the public discussion Superintendent Serreno stated that he had read the email from Jan Vandersloot regarding his concerns and stated that the process was followed as far as having the 500 feet in either direction but that this is unique versus residential because the properties are very large and so 500 feet only encompasses a few properties and several are owned by the same person. He noted that staff verified the signatures of the owners and has been brought forward for the Commission's consideration. He noted that it is a correct statement to say that that here is minor curb lifting and the report does review some damage within the last 5 years. Discussion ensued regarding CC &R's & HOA and After some additional discussion Director Harmon requested that this item be tabled until June. The Commission concurred. DISCUSSION / ACTION ITEMS 7. Appeal of Denied Tree Removal. Superintendent Serreno stated that staff recommends that the appeal for removal of one City Moreten Bay Fig parkway street tree located at 2421 Holly Lane be denied. He noted that on February 27, 2007, the City's Urban Forester John Conway and claims adjuster of Carl Warren and Company inspected the City Ficus macrophylla (Moreton Bay Fig), at the request of the property owner due to repeated sewer lateral obstruction and damage. The property owner filed a claim alleging private sewer lateral damage as a result of City Ficus tree roots. The private sewer lateral is owned and maintained by the claimant, and the sewer main is owned, maintained, and controlled by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. He noted that the claim investigation report concluded that the tree is approximately 23 feet from the private lateral, and that the cause appears to be the shifting lateral sections that allowed encroachment of tree roots into the lateral. However, the distance of the tree from the lateral would not be the primary cause of intrusion, but rather a deficient sewer lateral line in need of repair. Staff concurred with the claim investigation report, and concluded that the one City -owned Ficus macrophylla (Moreton Bay Fig) tree located in the adjacent parkway did not meet the criteria for removal as stated in City Council Policy G -1 — Retention or Removal of City Trees. The policy requires, "a repeated history of damaging public or private sewers" in order for the tree(s) to be eligible for removal. Additionally, the single claim filed by the property owner does not meet this requirement. This finding was forwarded for review to the General Services Director, Risk Manager, and City Manager, all who concurred with the determination. In order to mitigate future sewer lateral damage, a sewer lateral line repair will be required. Mr. Devling is appealing staffs decision and that is why it is before the Commission tonight. Chair Garrett opened the public discussion Jan Vandersloot stated that he lives around the corner and that this is a beautiful tree. He went on to say that this tree should not be removed and believes that the sewer lateral needs to be removed Parks, Beaches £t Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 4 and noted that the tree is over 23 feet away from the sewer and stated that there could be other trees in the area and might not be that tree and if the sewer was fixed then the tree would not be a problem but believes that every time you have a cracked sewer tree roots will find a way into the sewer and then cause problems for the homeowner. He stated that we should not be sacrificing this beautiful tree because someone has a broken sewer line and wants to remove a tree 23 feet away and then urged the Commission support staff's denial of the removal and noted that the Risk Manager, City Manager and the General Services Director all agreed that the tree should not be removed. He stated that the City values trees and that they are good and elevate property values and that they should not be removed if we do not have too. James Devling stated that he is the property owner and noted that they have been dealing with this tree for over 12 years and that they have not made repeated claims against the City but have had almost a monthly problem with this tree. He noted that for the first two years of living there they had Roto Rooter out almost every month and 10 years ago had most of the lateral in front of the house replaced and was not submitted in the claim package because this whole request is about removing the tree not about getting money refunded. He stated that he did bring tonight a letter from the plumber that replaced the lateral and notes the damage now and for the past several years It has continued to cause problems with monthly visits from the plumber. Mr. Devling stated that about every 2 -3 months if they do not get to it in time then they have problems with overflows and would really appreciate some help from the Commission. Chair Garrett closed the public discussion Commissioner Marston stated that she is unsure of what shifting laterals mean and asked what is the total length of the lateral and what is it replaced with; what kind is it now and wondered if it is because of the age that is causing a collapse. Question of how a new pipe could be placed 30 feet away from the tree and wondered if it was 23 feet and could it be replaced without disturbing the tree. Commissioner Allen asked what is the recommendation for a solution since everyone agrees that it is pretty much that tree is causing the problem and noted that if it was out sewer line it would be checked and then fixed and given that this is a Costa Mesa sewer line what is the solution to Mr. Devling problem. Superintendent Serreno stated that once the sewer lateral was replaced with an appropriate pipe that does not have seams or joints staff could install a root barrier at the sewer line or 4 to 5 feet away from the sewer line onto the private property and route the drip line of the tree which would prevent roots from going towards the pipe. Commissioner Allen asked if this meant that the City would replace the later or what. Superintendent Serreno stated that the homeowner would have to as the claim has been denied. George Van Hys, engineer stated that he believes that the tree roots are coming from the main line. Discussion ensued regarding the sewer lateral. Director Harmon stated that it is impossible to determine what came first the roots or the sewer line so recommended that the line must be replaced regardless of the finding here tonight and noted Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 5 that he was a little concerned that it was partially replaced up to the curb face and then stopped as a joint where of course roots could invade. He went on to say he would like to ask the homeowner to uncover the line (which would have to be done anyway) and contact staff and they will come and look at the line with the homeowner to see where the roots are going in and it at that time there can be a finding that the roots have broken this line then a claim could be made to the City and addressed then but noted that the entire line would need to be uncovered. Motion by Commissioner Lugar to request homeowner to uncover the line at their expense, contact staff to look at the line and if it is determined that that the roots are invading the line somewhere else then staff will work with the homeowner to file the claim. Motion carried by acclamation. 8. Lights for Lincoln School Field #3. Director Morgan stated that Recreation Manager Sean Levin would be introducing the topic and proceeding with the presentation. He stated that this item had been discussed in April and it was explained that staff had been approached by AYSO 57 to discuss lighting Field #3 at Lincoln. He stated that this is actually a decision that will be made in its final action by NMUSD but it was felt that since the City is the leaseholder and the participants at that site are NB residents that the first place to conduct and receive comments would be at the Commission level. He went on to say that the Commission's role is to gather input, make comments and they will be forwarded to the School District and will not be stopping along the way at the Council level. Recreation Manager Sean Levin thanked the Commission for agreeing the hear the issue and that the City leases the land at Lincoln Athletic Center from the NMUSD and is used by the youth and adult sports groups. He stated that the facility has three fields, two lighted and all three are scheduled, maintained and operated by the City. He stated that lit fields continues to be problem within the City and therefore AYSO 57 has proposed to install lights at Field #3 at their expense. Manager Levin stated that NMUSD staff are not opposed to the request. Gary Wright, AYSO 57 stated that the problem is that there is a lot of competition for Lit fields and that is why AYSO 57 is willing to donate $150,000 to light field #3 and noted that they are seeking approval through the minutes of the Commission. He stated that they have tried to be good neighbors and have not personally received any negative comments. He noted that Council Members have received emails from parents and hopes that everyone is feeling good regarding the outreach that has been done. He stated that the proposal is to install a 4 -pole system is a little higher then normal so that the light is shining more directly down on the field which will minimize the amount of light that spills out into the surrounding area. He went on to say that the lights are designed to be the lowest possible wattage to make it similar to the lights that are already installed. He stated that AYSO donates about $30,000 every year in actual field and maintenance and that does not include the goals or the first aid kits and all the other stuff that is used by our program but the other programs that compete for the same space such as adult soccer and lacrosse. He noted that they are even willing to cover the cost of the maintenance for these lights with a 25 year warranty so that there will be no overhead cost for the city. He stated that all they are asking for is approval by the Commission and urged them to forward their recommendation to the NMUSD to move on. Commissioner Allen asked Mr. Wright if he had talked to Spy Glass neighbors. Mr. Wright stated that he had spoken to the HOA Management of both Jasmine Creek and Spy Glass and emailed the proposal to them and has not heard any negative comment from them. Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 6 Director Morgan stated that in the staff report commissioners can find the postcard that was mailed out to all neighbors within 500 feet and Spy Glass homeowners and staff did not receive any phone calls. Commissioner Marston stated that she was in favor of the field lights but did question about street lighting on San Joaquin and wondered about the glare impact. Mr. Wright stated that he believed that there were street lights and that the spill does drop off rapidly from the field. Commissioner Marston stated that if San Joaquin is lit then there probably is not a glare issue. Manager Levin stated that he did receive a few calls - one from Spyglass Hill HOA and wanted to make sure that everyone got noticed and from Jasmine Creek HOA President that said there were a few residents that were not in favor of the installation. Chair Garrett opened the public discussion Andy Thompson stated that he was a resident of Jasmine Creek and noted that he was more concerned with the additional noise rather then the lighting that field #3 will create. He requested that if the lights are installed they include a tamper proof timer so that they are turned off at a reasonable time which would be 9pm to him but thought reasonable might be different for others. He stated that he had met with some of his neighbors and that they agreed with his comments made. Chair Garrett stated that the proposed lighting systems does include a card system that can be turned off remotely by City staff. Bob Kopicki representing the Canyon Crest Estates HOA noting that they are a small organization with 42 units directly across the street from Lincoln Athletic Center and are more impacted by the lights from field #2. He read the following into the minutes addressed to Director Morgan: The Canyon Crest Estates HOA Board of Directors wish to express their concern of the proposed new lights at Lincoln Athletic Center. The Board is opposed to these light installations because we anticipate much higher noise levels and an increase in traffic activity. He stated that basically if you are increasing field capability by 50% then it is believed that they will receive a 50% increase in noise and traffic. He went on to say that there is a timer on the existing lights that shuts them off at 10pm and a card system but unfortunately that has been somewhat abused and nobody wants to take the time to walk to the card slot and turn off the lights by themselves and let them go until 10pm and generally between 9 and 10pm there is no one on the field and so that is a horrible waste of electricity. Mr. Kopicki stated that the AYSO should be commended on their generosity however they are opposed to any additional lights at the Center. He stated that they have endured these existing lights on the two fields along with the traffic and noise and that Lincoln field #3 is a band -aid situation to the real problem because the City just needs a lot more lit fields for all the youth and other athletic organizations that want to use them. He suggested that an investigation be done to light up larger facilities such as Bonita Canyon Sports Park, Newport Coast, Harbor View and stated that these are all areas Parks, Beaches £t Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 7 where most of the people that use the fields actually live. He stated that it is time to share responsibilities and compromise a little. He stated that Lincoln already has two lit fields and believes that is more then enough and anymore should be installed somewhere else with a compromised sharing responsibility of who is going to be looking at the lights every night. Bob Caustin stated that he has a child that plays soccer and noted that scheduling is quite difficult, He noted that he felt sorry for those people that have problems with the sounds hearing of kids having fun. He urged the Commission to send it forward tot eh school district with their positive comments. Chair Garrett closed the public discussion Commissioner Brown stated that he thought that 10pm might be a little late and especially if the field is not being used and wondered if they did have a 9pm turn -off time for this particular set of lights and also for the existing ones if that would mitigate some of the concern. Recreation Manager Levin stated that he was glad that Commissioner Brown had asked that question. He went on to say that the current system is set to turn off at 10pm if not turned off manually before that. He stated that the system is a card key system and the coaches when they show up at the field need to slide their card thru which activates the system and it turns green; however, this is a constant challenge for staff because we are always having to remind the coaches that at the end of their games that they need to return; slide their card key again and push off the light system. Manager Levin stated sometimes that is why the lights are left burning and if they are left on and should anyone in the audience sees them that he would like for them to call the Park Patrol and they will come and turn them off. He noted that if the system were set up in a perfect world they would automatically turn off when the last person leaves the field - however that is not the way it works. Commissioner Brown asked if there were anything that could be done to encourage the coaches to be more cognizant of this issue from either an administrative standpoint or their own. Manager Levin stated that he is always asking that the coaches be notified usually by email about this requirement and typically it is in the beginning of the season when there are new coaches because it is a volunteer organization so there are new people that come on every year and so there is a learning curve in the beginning so we just have to remind them to turn them on and off and the problem get less and less. Commissioner Trapp asked if the fields are even used between 9 and 10pm and would it be problem for them to default to the 9pm hour. Manager Levin stated that it depends. He noted that there is no adult use except in the summertime. He said that he would need to check with Little League but thought that they were probably done no later then 9pm because it is kids we are talking about. He went on to say that it usually only goes to about then. Commissioner Lugar stated that he also agrees with Commissioner Trapp and that it seems reasonable to have a 9pm turn off time for the existing lights and the proposed lights and commented that he lives near a park and that at 10pm it does become bothersome. Parks, Beaches rt Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 8 Manager Levin stated that he would check with baseball noting that sometimes they do have a game slot that might go a little later then 9pm so in fairness to baseball staff would need to check with them. Chair Garrett stated that he would like to assure the residents that their comments are being taken very seriously and that the time and effort, and the amount of money that is being put into this project also has to be looked at and so it is the Commission's job to look at the greater good and noted that soccer fields are needed in this community and we need more lighted fields and it is possible that when more soccer fields come online later that this could be addressed again to mitigate the residents concerns if there are problems. He reiterated that the Commission does take this very seriously and this is just the beginning of a very long process and if there are concerns there will be many more opportunities to voice them. Motion by Commissioner Brown that the Commission (1) supports the installation of the lights at Lincoln Athletic Center Field #3, and (2) that since it appears that there does not need or seem to be any activity on the fields after 9pm and that the lights are currently in place are defaulted to 10pm; that they now be changed to turn off automatically at 9pm and therefore the residents would get some relief now and with the proposed lights that they also be defaulted to 9pm. Director Morgan stated that he would let the Commissioners know if there are street lights on San Joaquin. Mr. Wright stated that if there is going to be a limit on game to be complete and off the field by 9pm then asked if there was a way to dedicate the game slots time to kids games which run shorter as opposed to adults games. Motion carried by acclamation. 9. Newport Center Park Phase 1 - Commissioner Allen stated that she had a brief statement to make which she noted was essentially the same statement that she made at the April meeting. She went on to say that there has been a charge or a claim by some that she has a potential conflict of interest on this property and noted that she has had a survey done and an appraisal of her property and that she firmly believes that she does not have a conflict. However in the interest of the good of the order for the Commission she believes that she has become a distraction and has too much respect for the Commission to continue in that position and stated that she would recuse herself from the discussion. Commissioner Allen excused herself from the meeting and stated she would return at the beginning of the next item. Director Morgan stated that he would be reviewing why the issue was before the commission and what needed to be done in order to send it back to Council. He went on to say that he has worked as hard as he could by reviewing the video record of the Council meetings of February and March where different actions were taken; he noted that he has reviewed the official minutes and has worked with the City Attorney to determine exactly what it is that the City Council wants the Commission to do beginning tonight. He stated that at the Council meeting of March 27`h they considered their action of February 27`h and it was about the Newport Center Park and what it should be in terms of a park as it relates to this Commission's recommendation. Parks, Beaches £t Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 9 Director Morgan stated that it was a 4 -3 vote to move forward as a passive park following this Commission's action. He stated that for a variety of reasons the Council has now asked this Commission to take a fresh look at what design elements this park should include and stated that it was his understanding looking at the 6 -1 vote of March 27th that the purview of this Commission tonight is to look at park elements on that 12 -acre park above the library which would be phase 1 of Newport Center Park. Director Morgan stated that the Commission will receive a variety of comments and that they are welcome. He stated that those would be read into the record and forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation of the Commission regarding the park design elements for this site. He stated that the City Attorney has given clearance that this is what the Council wants from the Commission. He stated that in looking at the Council's action of March 27th that he had been asked where does the Commission begin, he noted that staff and City Attorney has determined that it should begin with the Council meeting of December 12, 2006. He noted that at that meeting the Council asked the City Manager to move forward with phase 1 of the development of Newport Center Park and that 4 items were listed in terms of finishing plans and getting it out to bid and so forth; and to bring that back to Council by January 23r6. He noted if that had been all that was said then this Commission would not have gotten involved on January 2 because the work was all done with years of planning and input and voting and the City Council had signed off on a lot of things that are included in the packet in terms of things that have been gone on over the years; but there was additional Council direction to look at active uses perhaps a soccer field. Director Morgan stated that with that issue it was returned to the Commission's area to look at to see if the use should be changed from passive to active. He stated that Commission looked at it on January 2nd because it needed to be back to Council by January 23rd. He stated that eventually it was heard by Council on February 27th and then for a variety of reasons that everyone is familiar with, and that it was decided on March 27th to start fresh with what was done on January 2 "d at this level and to take a new look at the park development and whether it should be passive or active. He noted that there were recommendations that this issue go even farther back then January 2 "d but in the end after going back through the video and reviewing it word by word on several occasions that it is staff's opinion that the work for the Commission is to look fresh at the action taken on January 2nd Commissioner Brown asked for a point of clarification and stated that going back to the meeting of January 2 "d he noted that the action taken by the Commission was more then just that Newport Center Park is a passive park. He reread the motion of January 2nd - he stated that the as possible to develop the Newport Center Park site as a passive park. He stated that he would like to make that point now that it was more then just a recommendation of a passive park but moving forward as a passive park as soon possible. Chair Garrett that if there are people here to talk about whether City Hall should be built on the park site that it would make no difference on how the Commission votes because it would have no bearing on the action that can be taken and is not part of what the Commission can consider. He stated that if you want to make a comment regarding that issue it would not become a point of discussion. Chair Garrett opened the public discussion Bill Ficker stated that the directions are pretty clear and that he would not take any of the Commission's time but that most everyone knows how feels about the development of that site Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 10 and that there are some wonderful opportunities for your future reference. He stated that there would be more discussion on this as time goes by but did want to leave some copies of presentations that have to do with the location of City Hall and the opportunity to use the site here on the Peninsula as an urban site. He stated that he respectfully submits those to the Commission. Jim Warren stated that he lives directly across from the park site and that he strongly recommends that this remain a passive park, not a soccer field; no lights on it and noted that it has been a park for nine years but that it is one of the only parks in the City without signage and would recommend that signage be posted noting that it is a park. He stated that because of that everyone sees it as fresh land and comes up with a new idea and that it is a park and that it should be signed as a park. Barry Allen stated he Newport Center Park is not appropriate for ball fields because there are two busy streets on both sides and that this is the reason that the Commission has rejected that suggestion before and that there really is no way to keeps balls off the road since there are not fences that could be built high enough to keep them in not to mention how high a soccer ball could be kicked. He stated that it is a real danger and no one wants that. He stated that the other issue is the grading of the site is not practical and would be very expensive to build any kind of a soccer field or to flatten it out would cause some site line problems and stated that having any kind of an active park is practical but suggest that the Commission consider that additional amenities be added to the parks, such as restrooms located near the parking lot that would be built along with the library; since it is the only area where permanent lighting would be and the library people could open the restrooms in the morning and close them at night and would keep park users from using the restrooms in the library; give consideration to a few more benches, picnic tables and thing like that in the area to encourage people to come to the area not only for purposes of sitting, reading, contemplating, looking at the flowers and grass, but also to sit down at some place other then the amphitheater and be able to have a lunch and if we scatter these things around the park it would encourage people to use it since this site has such a spectacular view and it would be shame to harm that view. He thanked the Commission for doing such a wonderful job in developing the park. Mark Arblaster stated that his family enjoys the passive parks in the City and noted that there are an ample number of them; but what the City does not have enough of is active parks specifically soccer fields and noted that if there were a soccer field at that side it could alleviate a lot of the pressure that is put on soccer volunteers trying to schedule places for the kids to play. He stated that there are many places to enjoy the view and why cant you enjoy the view while watching your child play. He urged that Commission to make it an active park specifically for soccer. Karin Tringalli stated that she lives in the Cameo community and suggested that this is the opportunity for the Commission as well as the City to really create a jewel and that there are active parks and passive parks but there is not what many great cities have and that is a real jewel of a park and that the original design perhaps with some modifications that have been submitted would really accomplish that. She urged the Commission to keep it as a passive park with additional amenities. Tom Moulson stated that he does not believe there is anything new that could be said on this subject so he stated that he was here when the recommendation was made, impressed by the Parks, Beaches It Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 11 quality of debate, and respect the integrity of the Commission and trust that they will keep their minds open and that nothing has changed and that you will forward the recommendation back to City Council to keep it as a passive park. Bernie Svalstad stated that he was the original chair of the fundraising committee that consisted of about 16 members that was approved by City Council to raise funds of $1.2 M for Newport Village which is now called Newport Center Park. He stated once the name was approved a donor called and so that is why the signs were not put up because it was thought that the negotiation would be completed in 6 months; that did not happen and the Council did not consider that and so the City lost $600,000 and now hopefully he is still willing to donate $600,000 and does agree that the City should keep it as a passive park and agrees with Mr. Allen that amenities should be added and that he has talked to a couple of Council Members and that they would like to have some restrooms and benches, etc. Jay Baker stated that he has been to many of these meetings to discuss the park and understood that the park should be a passive park and urged that the Commission approve Mr. Allen's recommendation that additional amenities be added to the park. He stated that the City should move forward and begin work on this site immediately. Bernie Svalstad stated that there is a 12 -acre park that is just about to start construction up in Newport Coast that The Irvine Company is building and that the City is not paying a dime for and that it would be completed in 2009 and that it would include ball fields, soccer fields, very active park and is not more then a mile or two from the Newport Center site and that the City is not very involved in it and construction should begin soon and should allay some of the problems of not having a active park in this area. Caroline Logan stated that the most beautiful cities have central parks very similar to the one that is being proposed for Newport Center Park and that these parks are not for sweat and tears in competition but rather for serenity, quiet and the personal experience of sharing a peaceful and quiet place near the center of town and please preserve our Newport Center Park as a passive park, a non - competitive park for our citizens. Novel Hendrickson stated that she was here that she believes that we are here today to redo your meeting of January 2nd and that she received some handouts other then what was given out originally and wondered if these new plans had been discussed or it they had been discussed at a meeting because she had been able find any evidence of that in any of the minutes and that this handout was different then the one that was shown in 2005 at a Council Study Session and then shown again in 2006. Chair Garrett stated that this has been an evolving process and that many of the plans are conceptual and probably what will be sent to Council depending how the vote goes will change from what they are today. Ms. Hendrickson continued by saying that really these plans are about 90% finished with planning. Chair Garrett stated that this is up to the Council and that they will either approve or disapprove these plans that are recommended to them. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 12 Ms. Hendrickson stated that they really never did because everything that she had studied since 1999 on this piece of land and has found that actually the City Council has only discussed this during Study Sessions and really never gave the opportunity early on in the development of this park to the public to have a public hearing which was asked for by Council Member Heffernan in 2002. She stated that this never happened and does not know who or what staff member or how this could be under the radar all this time. She went on to say that the only thing she could see that was ever approved at a public meeting of the City Council was the naming of the park. She stated that she read in the minutes that a tremendous amount of time was spent on Council Policy B -17 for the Council and that in naming of the park and the possible donation. She stated that this park does not have as it has been presented change so that the Commission has not had any input since 2005 in any of this. Chair Garrett stated that it was not necessarily true since the Park Development Committee is a publicly noticed meeting and many of those discussions took place there. Ms. Hendrickson stated that she realized that but in reviewing them that there are not minutes of those meetings. Chair Garrett stated that he believed that there are. Ms. Hendricks stated that he should review them then because it is very disappointing to the public since they trust that the Commission knows and reports what is going on and when it is found that the City Council never really approved this or brought it for public comment then it has been developed by the Park Development Committee and that the last time it was voted on was November 16, 2004 on the Newport Center conceptual plan and that is was set in motion to have the CIP to grant them $128,000 and then later in September another $58,000 for the plans that have been development and only a peak was given in 2006 and that it is amazing how this comes out and report that the point of the whole thing is that the Library is supposed to get the parking first and under phase 1 they don't. Director Morgan stated that he would not debate on whether parking for the library is supposed to be first of what is second or third. He stated that he does know what the direction is for tonight. He stated that when it comes to the fine points of Newport Center Park phase 1, that what is going on tonight is very important and will influence the outcome of what the concept will become once a final plan is approved. The things that are being discussed tonight such as a restroom or a place where it is more for a destination for picnics rather than for individual use will be extremely valuable and will be considered by the Council when they direct staff on the next steps to take place. He stated that Public Works will not put plans out for bid until Council has signed off. Commissioner Brown stated that his recollection and that those meetings are noticed and questioned whether minutes are kept. Director Morgan stated that these meetings are discussed at every Commission meeting and eventually they are in the minutes of the Commission. Commissioner Brown stated that he knows that amenities have been discussed for this park at Least three different times while he served on the Committee. He stated that he was not aware that official minutes were not being done but that he knew that the discussion of the Committee Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 13 were reported at the Commission meetings. He stated that he believes Ms. Hendrickson is accurate regarding the last time it was voted on regarding the concept in November 2004 and that it issues have not really been discussed since that time. Director Morgan stated that on September 19, 2006 Park Development Committee meeting that a review of the costs was discussed, and that two council members were in attendance. But of course no vote was taken at the committee level. Jim Warren stated that he had been invited to at least three separate public meetings that were in the Fire Conference Room and at least one here in the Council Chambers. He stated that they were advertised and the public was notified. Jan Vandersloot stated that he was speaking for himself as well as SPON. He went on to say that SPON is a city -wide organization representing 350 families and that SPON has been instrumental and very involved with the development of this park going back to 1992 when the CIOSA Agreement called for this site to be dedicated as open space by The Irvine Company. Which did happen and the City accepted it as open space and the concept of a passive park was actually first broached by Council Member Tom Tompson in 1997 and since then SPON developed a concept plan which was presented to the City and the current plan is largely developed on SPON's plan which is a city -wide organization and at the annual meetings over the years has been discussed and several presentation have been made on the park and what else could have been put on the park such as senior housing; the cultural arts center and all this time there have been fights and now we are fighting about putting City Hall going there. He stated that there has been a lot of activity related to this park and recalled that there have been several presentations made at Commission meetings on this park site regarding eh design and several the committee level. He stated that he personally sent out notices to have people come and express their opinions. He stated that the public has been aware and that now certain members of the public are coming down lately because they don't like what is happening here and want to see a City Hall at the site and so are going back and trying to find or poke holes in the process and that is what is happening now. Mr. Vandersloot stated that it is not because they are interested in what kind of park is there but they don't want to see a park period they want to see a City Hall and that is not the mission of the Commission, but the mission is to decide whether it should be passive or active park and encourage that the Commission stay by previous commitments and that the Commission has done a good job in analyzing the site and come up with a very good plan and noted that he is not opposed to additional amenities but that in the natural areas it should be natural with trails and signage. He urged the Commission to stand by their convictions and move forward with the same recommendation. Hugh Logan stated that there are two basic thoroughfares that open up the City and the glorious panoramas. He noted that one of them is Newport Coast Drive and the other is MacArthur Boulevard as you come over the hill and suddenly see the harbor area laid out. He noted that it is breathtaking and brings visitors, money and is a unique thing and a perfect place for a passive park. He stated that if it goes active and that you add one field to the ones already within the City that it does not seem to be worth it considering the grading and cannot imagine the first time a soccer balls flies out into MacArthur Boulevard. He urged the Commission to recommend that it remain a passive park. Chair Garrett closed the public discussion Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 14 Commissioner Trapp stated that she concurred with Barry Allen's suggestion that restrooms are needed and would answer come concerns on what people would do if they plan to stay at the park very long and believes that the additional of some picnic tables is a good idea. Commissioner Lugar stated that he also agrees with Mr. Allen and architecturally that unless you have facilities for people to gather then they will not gather and so it makes sense that we support it as a passive park but also additional amenities be added so people will visit the park. Commissioner Brown stated that he advocated very strongly that Newport Center is not an appropriate site for an active park and still believes that. He stated that active parks should be established within neighborhoods that are easily accessible for families. He went on to say that he views that area as a commercial area and that if we create a active park there that since we have a shortage of active park sites that it is important the land have multiple use and that this site could only accommodate one soccer field and would not answer any shortages that we have now. He stated that he is concerned about safety if it were an active park there. He stated that he does not support this site as an active site however he noted that everyone realizes that there is a need for active parks and believes that since we are in a climate where we look at how much money we have to spend and that he has some trouble agreeing that funds should be used to build another passive park for which we have a dearth of those already and ignoring the fact that we need active parks and the notion that we have an active park in Newport Coast already being built but noted that it would not serve the interest of the west side where there are no active parks at all. Commissioner Brown stated that his concern is not whether this should be an active park but rather that our motion that was passed in January was that the City begin construction on the site as soon as possible and noted that he no longer feels that way, He stated that is why he would like to have a unanimous vote on this of having is as a passive park but does not believe he could support a motion that would include recommending that Newport Center be constructed as a passive park with an inference that would probably come as full bore ahead. He stated that he would point to the General Plan and that the park is a low priority in the update and that this park has been discussed for years and now we are talking about ways to encourage use of the park. He stated that what he is asking the Commission to consider is that we recommend that Newport Center Park is an appropriate site for a passive park but that it not be a priority and that other priorities would serve the interest of many more residents of Newport Beach then this particular site at this particular time. Commissioner Lugar stated that priority is not an issue that is before the Commission to discuss. Chair Garrett stated he personally agrees that amenities should be added and could mitigate some concerns of those of the park not being used. He agreed that there is a shortage of soccer fields within the City but that this site would not answer those concerns. Motion by Chair Garrett to recommend to City Council that Newport Center Park be designated as a passive park and that additional user amenities, to include benches, picnic tables, parking, additional turf areas and a restroom. Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Brown, Garrett, Lugar, Trapp, Marston Absent: Ruzicka Recuse: Allen Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 15 the following amenities Director Morgan stated that in fairness that should a negative declaration be made for planning purposes and we are not challenged by SEQA regulations this input has been gathered he reminded the Commission that AYSO is very generous, cooperative, patient and there is a house on the hill. Recreation Manager Levin stated that there are houses up on Spyglass Hill that look down and they will be noticed as well but noted that there has been one resident that has some concerns. Commissioner Allen encouraged AYSO 57 to encourage homeowners at Spyglass to visit Turtle Rock and make a presentation at their HOA meeting because the last thing you want is that NMUSD feels that not enough public outreach was done. Commissioner Lugar asked who would own the lights. Director Morgan stated that in the end he believed that it would be the school district because it is physical property on their land; however the City collects hourly rates of $30 /hr for lights and believes that there will be a shared maintenance with AYSO. Mr. Wright stated that they have gone ahead with a 25 year warranty at their cost that covers replacement bulbs and any defect in the way it is lit. He noted that the State would actually own it as the school district is the custodian of the property. He stated that they would actually be making a donation to the State and what they need from the City is that they are ok with the donation. Manager Levin stated that AYSO provides $50,000 in maintenance to the fields each year as a minimum for upkeep; and Little League provided a backstop at $65,000 in addition to the grass work that they pay for. Chair Garrett stated that the Commission is aware of the need for additional lit fields but asked that they be ready for people that could be against it. Director Morgan stated that this issued would be agendized for May 15` Chair Garrett opened the public discussion; hearing none the public discussion was closed. 10.FY 2007/08 Recreation ft Senior Services Department Operating Budget. Director Morgan stated that staff had presented the budget to the Budget Committee and was requesting that the Commission recommend and support the FY 2007/08 Budget to the City Council. He stated that the budget has changed a little after discussions with City Manager. He turned it ove to the staff to make presentation on Recreation programs, Senior Center programs, Newport Coast Community Center and Park Patrol. The following staff presented: Recreation Manager Matt Lohr • Recreation Manager Sean Levin • Senior Services Manager Celeste Jardine -Haug • Recreation Supervisor Christine Stempleski Recreation Supervisor Raquel Rodarte Parks, Beaches £t Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 16 Recreation Supervisor Matt Dingwall Asst Recreation Coordinator Jessica Reiten Discussion ensued regarding Park Patrol. Manager Levin stated that that there is a financial impact with adding a full -time officer as there is no revenue to cover the service. After the presentation the Commission commended the staff for their presentation. Chair Garrett opened the public discussion Laura Curran asked about planting at Newport Coast Community Center. Discussion ensued regarding Foundations. Motion by Commissioner Allen to recommend approval of the submitted budget and to forward to City Council with their recommendation and to request that City Council consider allowing the Commission to look into Foundations. Commissioner Brown stated that there is a need to get Council's blessing to look into starting a Park 8 Recreation Foundation. Chair Garrett stated that he had talked to a Council Member about the issue and had appeared cold on the idea. Amended motion by Commissioner Allen to recommend approval of the submitted budget and to forward to City Council with their recommendation. Motion carried by acclamation Motion by Commissioner Allen to request permission by City Council to look into a Foundation. Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Allen, Brown, Lugar, Marston, Trapp Nay: Garrett Absent: Ruzicka COMMITTEE REPORTS - Parks- Nothing to report. RSS- Nothing to report. Budget- Nothing to report. AD - Hoc —Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report — Community Services Award - Nothing to report. Other —Santa Ana River Vision Plan- Commissioner Trapp stated that she was unable to attend the last meeting. — Memorial Committee- Chair Garrett stated that the Arts Commission is working on public outreach for an artist. — MarinaPark- Commissioner Allen asked when the Commission would receive information about what is going on there. Director Morgan stated that mobile homes are supposed to vacate by 2009. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting May 1, 2007 - 7pm Page 17 The following are new or ongoing items to be discussed: • Fire pit discussion on safety and to regulate what is burned • Discussion of possible implementation of Parks & Rec Foundation. • G -1 Policy Discussion • Parking Signage at Back Bay View Park • Dog Park • Updates on Parks • Reforestation Request - 4200 Campus Drive ADJOURNMENT- 9:15pm Submitted by: IS Teri Craig, Admin Assis