HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 2002-11-12
10-28-02 / 11-12-02
world, Mayor Larson mentioned that the traffic exiting
Leisure World'is backed up due to a new signal system, he has
received explanations from the City Engineer several times,
and he has been assured that the problem will be resolved.
CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session was held.
I
ADJOURNMENT
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council,
to adjourn the meeting until Tuesday, November 12th, 2002 at
6:30 p.m. to meet in Closed Session if necessary. By
unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 9:16 p.m.
t Clerk and
the City of,
clerk
.
Approved:
~
Attest:
I
Seal Beach, California
November 12, 2002
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
adjourned session at 6:30 p.m. with Mayor Larson calling the
meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Larson
Councilmembers Antos, Campbell, Doane, Yost
Absent:
None
Also present: Mr. Bahorski, City Manager
Mr. Barrow, City Attorney
Ms. Yeo, City Clerk
There were no public comments to the items identified on the
agenda.
I
CLOSED SESSION
The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in
Closed Session to discuss the items identified on the agenda
pursuant to Government Code Sections 54957.6, 54956.8,
54956.9 (a) and (b), to confer with the City's labor
negotiator, the real property negotiator, with legal counsel
relating to one case of anticipated litigation, and existing
litigation in case BC277499, Peddicord versus Linc Housing.
The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:31 p.m. and
reconvened at 7:06 p.m. with Mayor Larson calling the meeting
11-12-02
to order. The City Attorney reported that the Council had
discussed the items set forth on the agenda, gave direction
with regard to Items "A" and "C", the conferences with the
labor negotiator and with legal counsel relating to
anticipated litigation, no other reportable action was taken.
I
ADJOURNMENT
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council,
to adjourn the meeting at 7:07 p.m.
Approved:
- lc bI-.V ~~Ol.-<
-
Mayor
Attest:
I
Seal Beach, California
November 12, 2002
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
session at 7:07 p.m. with Mayor Larson calling the meeting to
order with the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Larson
Councilmembers Antos, Campbell, Doane, Yost
Absent:
None
Also present:
Mr. Bahorski, City Manager
Mr. Barrow, City Attorney
Mr. Dancs, Director of Public Works/City
Engineer
Captain Schaefer, Police Department
Ms. Arends-King, Director of Administrative
Services
Mr. Cummins, Associate Planner
Mr. Vukojevic, Deputy City Engineer
Ms. Yeo, City Clerk
I
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilman Yost requested that Item "U" be removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate consideration, Councilmember
Campbell requested Items "I, N, P, Q, and S" removed, and
Councilman Antos requested Items "I, 0, and U" removed.
Doane moved, second by Yost, to approve the order of the
agenda as revised.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
11-12-02
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Campbell announced the upcoming Holiday at
Heather Park event on Saturday, December 7th. She also
mentioned having received a number of telephone calls
relating to the traffic signals at Candleberry and Rose at
Lampson, to that she explained that some irrigation work was
done, the areas were patched, the signal loops were then
imbedded in the roadway, Rose/Lampson is now working however
some problems remain with Candleberry/Lampson, driver
patience is needed just a bit longer. Councilman Antos
mentioned the recent flu clinic at the Mary Wilson Library
Senior Center, and commended the efficient manner in which it
was run.
I
PRESENTATIONS
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Larson proclaimed the remaining holiday months of 2002
and all of 2003 as "Buckle Up For Life Challenge" and pledged
to encourage the citizens to buckle up seat belts and child
safety seats each and every time they travel in a motor
vehicle.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Larson declared the Public Comment period to be open.
Ms. Joyce Parque, 6th Street, said she wished to speak
regarding the Redevelopment Agency again, noted that at the
last meeting there was a vote to disband ,the Agency, three
voted no, two voted yes, there is no Redevelopment Agency in
the districts of those three people, College Park East,
College Park West, or Leisure World. Ms. parque suggested
that the residents of those areas should be alarmed as 1119
Ocean was not located in an Agency Project Area either, the
only Agency areas in Old Town Seal Beach is the greenbelt and
Surfside, 1119 Ocean was located outside the Riverfront
Project Area, the Agency/City Council had to make certain
findings and adopt a resolution that made a determination as
to how the housing project would benefit the Project Area, it
was the opinion of staff that renovation of the property
would constitute a benefit to the Riverfront project Area,
and stated if that could be done outside the Project Area,
where some of the most expensive property is located, and was
livable, it could be done in other neighborhoods as well,
that because as long as the Riverfront Project Area exists
twenty percent of all tax increment must be spent for low to
moderate income housing. She offered that from 1993 to 1997
there were deferred payments into the low to moderate income
housing fund because there were not enough taxes coming to
the Riverfront project, that is when property values went
backwards, so to get the $668,000 that the Agency had to pay
a penalty on and the money to sell the, Trailer Park, the
City/Agency floated bonds of $9,205,000, of that amount the
Agency/City had to payoff bonds of $5,335,000, alleged this
to be a pyramid scheme, after escrow closed, for which it is
said there were $900,000 and some in fees, there was
$2,970,000, therefore after the pump station goes in she
inquired as to how the twenty percent setaside is going to be
dealt with in that it is mandated and is for families. Ms.
parque stated that in 1981 the Trailer Park had one hundred
twenty low income lots, the people paid their own rent, the
firm of the City Attorney prepared the covenants, how did
they become unenforceable, after the Park sale in 2000 the
taxpayers now pay to subsidize one hundred lots with rental
assistance, twenty lots were lost, that is $340,000 for three
years, for the next twelve years the property taxes will be
I
I
11-12-02
paying $965,000, and asked that someone explain to the
taxpayers why the covenants were not enforceable. Ms. Parque
also made reference to a news article relating to legal fees,
and said she is coming to meetings because she cares about
her City. There being no further comments, Mayor Larson
declared Public Comments to be closed.
I
COUNCIL ITEMS
APPOINTMENT - RECREATION and PARKS COMMISSION
Mayor Larson moved to appoint Ms. Annabeth Goering as the
District Two representative to the Recreation and Parks
Commission for the unexpired term ending July, 2005. Mayor
Larson noted that Ms. Goering was actively involved in the
development of Edison Park and resides in the immediate area.
Councilman Doane seconded the motion.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "c" thru "u"
Yost moved, second by Doane, to approve the recommended
action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except
for Items "I, N, 0, P, Q, S, and U", removed for separate
consideration.
C.
Approved the waiver of reading in full of
all ordinances and resolutions and that
consent to the waiver of reading shall be
deemed to be given by all Councilmembers
after the reading of the title unless
specific request is made at that time for
the reading of such ordinance or resolution.
I
D. Approved the minutes of the October 14, 2002
and October 28th, 2002 regular adjourned
and regular meetings.
E. Approved regular demands numbered 39707
through 39873 in the amount of $633,085.32,
payroll demands numbered 17976 through 18108
in the amount of $157,399.41, and authorized
warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same.
F. Adopted Resolution Number 5071 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A
BUDGET AMENDMENT, NO. 3-12, TO REAPPROPRIATE
FUNDS FOR PROPERTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 5071 was waived.
G.
Adopted Resolution Number 5073 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A BUDGET
AMENDMENT, NO. 03-13, FOR MISCELLANEOUS
ADJUSTMENTS OVERLOOKED DURING BUDGETING PROCESS."
By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 5073 was waived.
I
H. Authorized the City Attorney to include the City
of Seal Beach in the Amicus Petition to the
United States Supreme Court relating to the
American Disabilities Act and sidewalk
accessibility.
11-12-02
J.
Adopted Resolution Number 5074 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED
BUSINESS ENTRPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM AND
OVERALL ANNUAL GOAL OF FIVE POINT FIVE PERCENT
(5.5%) FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2003, FOR
ADOPTION AND SUBMISSION TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS)." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 5074 was waived.
I
K. Adopted Ordinance Number 1492 entitled "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADDING
CHAPTER 5a TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH RELATIVE TO GRADING REQUIREMENTS."
The City Attorney read the title of Ordinance
Number 1492, and by unanimous consent, full reading
of Ordinance Number 1492 was waived.
L. Adopted Resolution Number 5075 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS AND
GRANT DEED OF REAL PROPERTY ROAD RIGHT-OF-
WAY FOR BUS TURNOUTS ON NORTHERLY SIDE OF
LAMPSON AVENUE." By unanimous consent, full
reading of Resolution Number 5075 was waived.
M.
Approved the Water Supply Assessment prepared
for the Boeing Space and Communications
Headquarters site, said Assessment to become
part of the Draft Environmental Impact Report
for the Boeing project.
I
R. Denied the claim of Elizabeth Aileen Magner
for personal injuries and referred same to
the City's liability counsel and adjuster.
AYES:
NOES:
Denied the claim of the Board of Supervisors,
County of Orange, seeking indemnification and/
or contribution from the City on a comparative
fault/pro-rata basis relating to the Zekarias
Kidane claim.
T.
Adopted Resolution Number 5078 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF THE NORTH
AND SOUTHBOUND TURN POCKETS LOCATED AT THE
MAIN STREET/PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION."
By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution
Number 5078 was waived.
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
I
ITEM "I" - COUNCIL POLICY - PROPERTY OWNER WORK REOUESTS
Councilman Antos said he would assume that this Policy will
address some of the questions that came up during the recent
alley projects where residents wanted to tie in certain
replacement projects, upgrade of waterlines, etc. and instead
of the residents trying to individually work with the
contractor the City would attempt to obtain prices. The
Director of Public Works said the Policy requires that unit
price work be bid out for a specific item, whether it be for
11-12-02
I
a square foot of sidewalk or driveway, or water service
connection, if it is a complicated change order situation
that is not something that is done with the resident.
Councilman Yost asked if the intent is to obtain a set unit
price for a volume of work, the response of the Director said
it is more to have the resident take advantage of the unit
pricing, if the City were to allow individual resident deals
that would add to the administration costs for the project
and possibly cause delays. councilmember Campbell expressed
her belief that this is a step forward to work with the
residents to get work done that both the City and the
residents need. Antos moved, second by Campbell, to approve
the Council Policy for Requests for work During Public Works
Construction Projects.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
I
ITEM "N" - ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY -
"DIRECTIONS 2030" - LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Councilmember Campbell stated that although this Plan is for
some twenty years into the future her feeling is that the
residents of Seal Beach, specifically those in College Park
East, should be aware of what CalTrans and OCTA are looking
at. She made reference to the more recent proposal to take
six homes from College Park East to accomplish the widening
of the 405 Freeway, and even though that was determined to
not be necessary it resulted in anguish for those homeowners.
In "Directions 2030" the proposal is to add an auxiliary lane
to the 405 from Beach Boulevard to the 605, they are putting
the HOV connectors back for consideration from the 22 to the
405 and the 405 to the 605, there is possibility of a
commuter rail down the center of the 405, her concern is with
the widening of the 405 between the 22 and the 605, the
government does not to relinquish any land, they contend that
their arc goes up to the fence line, therefore there could be
an impact on the homes along Almond Avenue, should these
proposals ever be brought forward the residents need to be
prepared to fight the issue.
Councilman Doane agreed, however moved to receive and file
the staff report relating to OCTA's Long Range Transportation
Plan "Directions 2030" and to authorize the City Manager to
submit formal comments to OCTA. Councilmember Campbell
seconded the motion.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
I
ITEM "0" - COUNCIL POLICY - REOUESTS FOR WORK - GUM GROVE
PARK
Councilman Antos said he would assume this item is in
response to an issue that came before the Council at the last
meeting where heavy equipment was used in Gum Grove park,
that this is a method to protect the Park and public areas.
Staff confirmed that it was. Antos moved, second by Yost, to
adopt the Council policy regarding requests for work by
property owners in Gum Grove Park.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
ITEM "P" - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE / CONSULTING SERVICES - RESOLUTIONS
NUMBERED 5076 & 5077
11-12-02
Councilmember Campbell inquired if the City will be provided
with the insurance coverages for general and auto liability.
The City Manager responded that the insurance certificates
will be part of the contract. In reference to a statement in
the staff report that 'services required in addition to the
forty hours a week would be $120 per hour with a minimum of
four hours,' councilmember Campbell inquired if that is open I
ended or can a maximum be set, noting that the contract with
MTSI was $8,000 per month, this firm is $8,400 per month, the
cost is more but services will be for more hours, again asked
if a limit will be set on the additional hours. The
Administrative Services Director responded that the provision
is standard in the event there is some type of emergency
where their services would be required over and above the
forty hours per week, a situation that is most unlikely, not
expected to used, the option of the City would be whether
they would want immediate service or wait until the following
week, the firm will be paid for forty hours a week and if
additional hours are needed the City would need to authorize
those hours, that is the same as the prior contract, also,
the rates are basically standard. Councilmember Campbell
stated she would abstain from voting on this item as she is a
friend of Mr. Boychuck of MTSI.
Doane moved, second by Antos, to award the professional
services agreement for information technology and consulting
services to WHIPSYS, Inc. for a period of one year, authorize
the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the
City, and
adopt Resolution Number 5076 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING BUDGET
AMENDMENT NUMBER 03-11 FOR NON-DEPARTMENTAL INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY CONTRACT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE 2002/2003
FISCAL YEAR," and
I
adopt Resolution Number 5077 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING BUDGET
AMENDMENT 04-0l FOR NON-DEPARTMENTAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CONTRACT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE 2003/2004 FISCAL
YEAR." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolutions
5076 and 5077 was waived.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
ITEM "0" - CONTRACT RENEWAL - AMPCO SYSTEM PARKING SERVICES
Councilmember Campbell mentioned that in looking at the
fiscal impact it appears that the revenue generated was
$305,214 of which the City received $203,389, which means the
City did not receive $101,825, the projection for next fiscal
year is $85,500 and $63,750 based on the gross revenue
remaining at $305,000, in her opinion it will not stay at
$305,000 because if parking meters are installed there will
be people using the beach lots where they previously parked I
on Main Street for free, therefore revenues will increase.
Again noting the $101,825 that the City did not receive,
Councilmember Campbell once again inquired how much it would
cost to employ someone to take the parking lot tickets, the
question is what is the most reasonable way to go. The
Administrative Services Director pointed out that the prior
year was one of the worst years in terms of parking lot
revenue, the City ended up with all of the money with nothing
going to AMPCO to cover their costs, then as part of the
contract renewal last year a provision was included so that
-
11-12-02
I
they could make up for some of the costs that they lost, that
is why the $200,000 so that they can slowly recover the costs
of the machines and the person who monitors them, that is
where the $101,825 went because AMPCO paid the City even more
than was collected in that prior year. Councilmember
Campbell again inquired as to the cost to hire a person to
collect the parking lot fees. The Director reminded again
that in the prior year AMPCO provided the City with more
money than was collected, and in the staff report at the time
AMPCO was selected the actual costs for City operation were
set forth, it is not just the cost of the ticket taker, there
are costs associated with the Lifeguard Department overseeing
the operation, the time required for the Finance Department
to count the cash, the Police Department involved with
transporting money back and forth, as well as issues such as
accountability, the recommendation of the auditors was to
automate the parking lots, her recollection was that the
costs to man the lots was between $50,000 to $60,000 per
year, that would be the three lots, recollection too that
there were five employees. With regard to the parking meter
issue the City Manager noted that meters may go in on Main
Street, yet what has been learned from projecting revenue
from some of the development projects is to not count the
money until it starts coming in, the revenue estimates do not
factor in what may occur because people are being guided into
the beach lots, that is a long way away, this is
conservative, that is why this contract is year to year, the
revenues are always in a state of flux.
I
Councilman Doane moved to approve the renewal of the contract
with AMPCO System Parking, Inc. for the term of two years and
authorize the City Manager to execute same on behalf of the
City. Councilman Yost seconded the motion. Mayor Larson
expressed his agreement with Councilmember Campbell, the
parking booth employees in attendance at the time spoke of
their service to the community for those who frequented the
beach, the contractor spoke of their modern machines,
computers, etc., he reluctantly voted for the AMPCO contract
yet felt bad for those who lost their employment, then there
were calls from people who could not understand the system
therefore received citations, he would assume that has now
been resolved. The Manager said as mentioned in the staff
report additional machines will be installed in the lots
which will make it easier for people to use.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
I
ITEM "s" - SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT POLICY
It was clarified to Councilmember Campbell that 'parties on
park space involving less than twenty-five people, no
alcohol, no live music' and 'events which are wholly
contained within a City owned facility' are different in that
one is wholly within a building, the other is park space,
neither would require a special event permit. Councilmember
Campbell referred to Section 19E-5 of Ordinance 1491 that
states '...the Director of Development Services may accept a
special event permit application filed less than thirty days
in advance when the special event is proposed to be conducted
in a City park and there is adequate time for review...', and
to her question the response was that a previously referenced
wedding would have been allowed yet the other factors are
that it would be less than twenty-five people and no alcohol.
Her question was then what if this wedding party merely
appeared at the park, could they have done that. The
11-12-02
Associate Planner offered that there is a somewhat grey area
as far as enforcement, in most cases it would be difficult to
know that the people were in the park unless a complaint was
lodged, the appropriate procedure is to obtain a permit if
there were to be more than twenty-five people. With regard
to Section 19E-5(D), Councilmember Campbell noted the
language that 'no special event organizer shall be issued
more than six special event permits per calendar year for a
particular property', yet the CPE Neighborhood Association
utilizes Heather Park for six possibly more events in a year,
does that language mean that the Association could not
reserve the Park for all of their events, and some residents
would like more events that there are currently. The Manager
responded that his recollection was that the six events
annually were meant to deal with activities on Main Street
rather than in parks. To Section 19E-5(B-2) with regard to
submittal of a list of the special event permits for the
previous twelve months, the Planner said the intent was to
assist staff in identifying how many permits had been issued
in the past, staff is working on preparing a master list of
special event permits that have been issued so that people
can be apprised of when they should be making application for
those permits. with regard to Section 19-E-6(A-1) which
states that 'the special event organizers shall conspicuously
provide public notice of such time period and boundaries by
posting signs at approved locations', to that Councilmember
Campbell asked where those may be placed along Lampson
Avenue. The planner responded that what is meant is that the
person physically have the permit in hand in the event that
the City receives a complaint and as an example on a weekend
an officer would be dispatched to respond, the organizer can
then show that it is a permitted event. She mentioned there
is also the life insurance policy that indemnifies the City.
Councilmember Campbell then made reference to the Policy,
Section 3 referring to 'short term', item two states 'all
other events held on private property, up to, but not
exceeding two days', to that she noted that this would be on
private property, a private event, therefore why would the
City get involved at all, to that the Planner mentioned that
there are things that come up that are not otherwise allowed
under the Zoning Code, outdoor sales on top of parking in a
shopping center would be an example. Councilmember Campbell
clarified that her comment was directed to private
residential rather than commercial, a private party on
private property, example, a bounce system for a childs party
located entirely on private property, would that require a
permit. The Planner offered that that would be at the
discretion of the Council, it could be included in the policy
whereby people would be required to obtain a special event
permit for such use. Councilmember Campbell noted that under
'Other Privately Held Events' that would require a CUP or
other land use entitlement if more than six such events were
held in a calendar year, and includes 'parties in residential
areas of the City where children's entertainment apparatus
are used', stating it should not be the business of the City
if the apparatus is located on private residential property,
to that the Planner stated he is learning more about these
types of apparatus, an application has been submitted for a
giant blowup slide, that could have an impact on a
neighborhood depending upon how many children may be
involved, it is believed that staff would prefer that if the
apparatus is totally on private property that it not require
a special event permit as there is noticing required and
people will not realize that they need a permit for the
activity within the thirty day period.
I
I
I
11-12-02
m
Councilmember Campbell again expressed her opinion that a
private party on private residential property, the general
public not invited, should not be the business of the City,
it is over regulating, the Policy needs to be rewritten. The
Planner indicated staff agreement, and with regard to private
residential parties stated that the City would want to have a
special event permit should someone want to engage a live
band, the Council could strike the entire provision for
childrens entertainment apparatus. Councilmember Campbell
said she would like that provision stricken if there was
Council concurrence. Mayor Larson agreed, his feeling was
that it was not appropriate to begin with. Councilman Yost
moved that amendment.
I
With regard to more than six events requiring a CUP, the
Planner stated that special events are defined as something
that the Zoning Code land use restrictions would not
otherwise allow, that is its purpose, therefore if there is a
situation where more than six special event activities are
granted within the year then the Zoning Code should be
amended to allow those types of activities in the zone in
which they would be located, that was the intent of the
limitation of six. Councilmember Campbell stated again that
when it comes to private residential property her belief is
that the City is getting carried away. Mayor Larson inquired
if the City requires a permit for yard or garage sales, the
response was it does not, and to that the Mayor mentioned
that that involves more people and noise than other
activities. Councilmember Campbell mentioned that CPE has an
annual garage sale, does not believe that they obtain a
permit, and throughout the year other residents will have a
garage sale. Mayor Larson noted that some cities have a
problem with people who are in the used property business and
where they hold a garage sale every weekend therefore they
regulate to allow just so many per year. Councilmember
Campbell mentioned that that had occurred in College Park
East at one time, it was resolved when the individual was
contracted and informed that he was conducting a commercial
enterprise. Councilman Doane questioned the outdoor dining
restriction, inquiring if that meant barbecues. The City
Manager mentioned that the issue of six events was to deal
with non-residential businesses, therefore language could be
inserted to read '...further, the City will take the policy
that more than six events in a non-residential area in one
calendar year shall necessitate a Conditional Use Permit...'
Councilman Antos suggested that 'outdoor dining in non-
residential zones' be added.
I
with reference to page one of the staff report Councilmember
Campbell made reference to the third bullet that states that
'events at the Marina Center and Senior Center which serve
alcohol should not need a special event permit by virtue of
the fact that the fee resolution already contains a provision
to charge for alcohol sales at those sites', question, what
about the North Seal Beach Center. The Planner responded
that the fee resolution was checked, nothing was found that
dealt with the North Community Center, if the Council so
chooses staff will add the North Center and then add it to
the fee resolution when it is next adopted. Councilmember
Campbell countered that all of the rules and regulations that
apply to Marina and the Senior Center already apply to the
North Seal Beach Community Center, to that the Planner stated
that as amended at this meeting if there was an event that
was wholly enclosed in the North Center a special event
permit would not be needed unless there was live music or
11-12-02
alcohol, at the discretion of the Council the alcohol
provision could be deleted and only require a special event
permit if there is live music. Councilman Doane pointed out
that in Leisure World each Mutual has its own policies, some
of those may be in conflict with the City's policies,
therefore which takes precedence, example is that only one
patio sale per year may be allowed, he has no argument merely
a perceived conflict at some point. Question was raised if
these policies even apply to Leisure World.
I
Councilman Yost suggested that this be postponed until the
next meeting and in the meantime the members of the Council
having concerns work them out with staff. Councilmember
Campbell stated that the language suggested by the City
Manager will resolve her concern. The Manager offered to
include under 'purpose and Intent' language to reflect that
'events within Leisure World, given its nature as a guarded
community, these policies do not apply.' Mayor Larson noted
the concerts held in the amphitheater with live music.
Council indicated satisfaction with the policy as amended
provided that residential private property is removed as well
as the childrens activities. Yost moved, second by Doane, to
adopt the revised Policy Statement with regard to Special
Event Permits.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
ITEM "U" - COUNCIL POLICY - PUBLIC RECORDS REOUESTS
Given the knowledge that there are some persons in the
community that generate the majority of requests for public
records, Councilman Yost asked if those requests would also
be considered a public record, as it takes considerable City
resources to generate such documents, would it be public
knowledge if the policy is abused. The City Attorney
responded that the public records request form would be a
public record and available to anyone requesting same. It
was confirmed that this policy is in compliance with the
California Public Records Act. Councilmember Campbell noted
that some documents are not available to the general public
such as personnel files, confidential documents so marked
regarding litigation, etc., she mentions this in that there
was an individual who was familiar with the workings of
cities that came to City Hall for documents which was in turn
used against the City. She mentioned that the Request
provides for either review or copies of records, it may be
worthwhile to obtain something, such as car keys or drivers
license, from the person requesting review to assure that a
file is returned in tact inasmuch as for the most part people
would be reviewing documents at the table outside the office
of the City Clerk. The Mayor reminded that under the
Political Reform Act one can not even require a name.
Councilman Antos noted that the City Clerk, as an elected
official is responsible for the records of the City, he would
assume the Clerk would do whatever is felt necessary with or
without a Council policy as far as document security
measures. Councilmember Campbell offered that this would be
an across the board Policy applicable to all rather than
discretionary, thus removing the ability for challenge.
I
I
Yost moved, second by Doane, to approve the Council policy
relating to public records requests as presented.
11-12-02
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
I
WATER OUALITY COMMITTEE
Councilman Antos said it was he who requested that this
matter be placed on the agenda, he is aware that the City did
have a water committee in recent past that dealt primarily
with water runoff, however there are some things that he
feels the City would be better served by having a committee
look at, bring them to the Council, and then the Council
could either adopt the policies or send appropriate letters,
this would include such things as desalination, which Long
Beach and other areas ,are looking at, there are some
technologies being looked at with regard to cleaning the
water from the Sanitation District and perhaps making that
available in the future for use in parks and common areas, he
was uncertain if anyone has asked the Sanitation District if
that is in their plans for future years. Councilmember
Campbell stated that the Sanitation District voted in favor
of the reclamation project at their last meeting. Councilman
Antos said he also believed that the City needs to adopt a
policy dealing with installing lines for such things when
streets and alleys are torn up, also with the lack of rain he
is aware of a problem with not enough ground water, there is
not much being done about'water conservation citywide, and
from time to time there are reports of contaminants and
ground water intrusion on private and public property.
Councilman Antos stated from his point of view it would be
well if a citizens committee were appointed to look at some
of these issues, the committee may have a fair amount of work
or it could be for a short period of time, his feeling is
that the Council would benefit from getting the information
and then pass it along to the general public. Councilman
Yost noted that he placed a similar matter on the agenda
about four years ago but it was not approved, he still thinks
it is a good idea, the beach is the community's livelihood,
yet he is not in favor of adding more bureaucracy, a beach
committee in the past ran into some problems in that they
were recommending things that the Council did not want to do,
but he would support this proposal. Councilmember Campbell
noted that when the Outfall Group was working to stop the
waiver they came to this Council and in turn this was the
first city to vote to stop the waiver, that was so important,
the outfall is four and a half miles off of Huntington Beach,
it is one hundred twenty inches wide. At the last Sanitation
District the board voted to join with the Orange County Water
District for the reclamation project, this too was important
yet there was really no one there from the general public,
once there is a reclamation project then the District can
stop pumping through the outfall pipe, before you can cleanup
the ocean you first have to stop polluting it, in her opinion
a desalinization plant is out of this City's league, the most
this City could do is read the articles as to how the Long
Beach project is going. Councilman Doane mentioned that
studies are being done on desalinization. Councilman Yost
noted that the plant in Long Beach is at the tank farm, they
would discharge a highly concentrated brine into the San
Gabriel River as a result, that would be fought with every
means possible. Councilman Doane said that is one of the
reasons it is not going anywhere. He offered his belief that
when the Ad Hoc Committee was formed Councilman Yost was very
active in the San Gabriel River project, then there were two
persons who pointed out some things in this community that
could possibly be polluting, those persons were then
appointed to the Committee because of their interest, he
I
I
11-12-02
believes that the Committee served its purpose and provided
good input, Campbell is on the sanitation District, Yost
continues to be involved in the Conservancy, he sits on the
West Orange County Water Board, his opinion is that a
citizens committee is really not needed to also become
involved, committees cost money, they take staff time and
attendance, given this time of budget concerns he did not
feel another committee needs to be formed. Councilmember
Campbell noted that she also serves on the Sanitation
District Runoff Committee and the Planning, Design and
Construction Committee. With regard to reclamation,
Councilman Doane confirmed that it does require separate
pipes however they are not available at this time, the
landscaped areas along the freeways are being watered with
reclaimed water, it would mean bringing an extension of those
pipes into this City if the desire was to use reclaimed water
for the golf courses, greenbelt, etc. Councilman Yost
mentioned that the main facility for Long Beach production of
reclaimed water is on the confluence of Coyote Creek and the
San Gabriel River, at present they are producing in excess,
at about half the cost of tap water, in fact a meeting was
held a couple of years ago with the Long Beach water group,
including the City Manager and officials, to look at the
financial aspects, at this time it is not financially viable
even though it should be kept in mind for the future.
Councilman Antos said it seems that the technology is now
coming into being, however until the City has some idea as to
when this water is going to be available it seems that the
Council and City Engineer should come together on policy if
there is desire to ever use reclaimed water, a number of
opportunities have been missed, Seal Beach Boulevard was just
recently torn up as have been other streets and alleys, a
perfect opportunity to drop in pipe, otherwise should water
become available from the freeway pipeline it would be
necessary to tear up Seal Beach Boulevard, very costly, so it
would seem realistic to look into the future, maybe twenty
years, otherwise the City will be using potable water for the
landscaped areas, there could be a significant savings at
half the cost for the golf course and open areas in Leisure
World if the pipes were in place, again at this time there is
no policy to put the infrastructure in place when streets and
alleys are torn up. It was mentioned that it also depends on
which side of the street is torn up, one side is sewer, the
other is water. Councilman Yost asked that staff take
another look at this because there is an easy access to Seal
Beach which is down the San Gabriel River given that the
plant is on the River, this was looked at about two years
ago, and suggested that contact be made with the water person
in the City of Long Beach, at that time it was not
financially viable, it may have changed some by now, it is
about half the cost and facilities would likely pay for
themselves.
I
I
Antos moved, second by Yost, to proceed to form a Water
Quality Committee.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Yost
Campbell, Doane, Larson
I
Motion failed
EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING USES - PROPOSED URGENCY ORDINANCE
The Associate Planner noted that a request was received from
Councilman Antos ,to prepare a draft urgency ordinance to
address additions to legal nonconforming residential
structures, principally located in the Old Town area. The
Planner mentioned that there are a number of reasons why a
11-12-02
I
structure may be nonconforming, density, there could be too
many units for what the property is zoned, parking is an
issue, setbacks, the Code previously allowed detached garages
to be close to property lines, that is no longer allowed. He
stated that Section 28-2407 sets forth the provisions under
which one can add to those types of properties, the type of
nonconformity basically determines what one can do, the Code
in general splits the enlargements into what is defined as
minor alterations and enlargements and major alterations and
enlargements, he explained that a minor enlargement is a
Consent Calendar item at the Planning Commission level with
different criteria for what is allowable under those
provisions, example, on a duplex or single family home if one
wanted to add up to two hundred eighty-eight square feet per
unit it would be a minor plan review, if greater square
footage was desired it would then be a major plan review
process, if the structure were a triplex or larger property
up to one hundred forty-four square feet per unit could be
added up to a maximum of four hundred square feet per
property under the minor plan review process, to add more
than that it would be a major alteration or enlargement
having specific procedures depending upon what the
nonconformity is, that is typically a Conditional Use Permit
with a full public hearing before the Planning Commission.
The process currently allows the Commission to look at each
application individually on its own merits, there is
typically five to seven of these types of requests each year,
slowing somewhat the last couple of years with property
values rising. The Associate planner pointed out that the
Council was provided a history, set forth in the supplemental
memo, listing all of the projects that have been approved by
the Planning Commission, shows whether or a not a building
permit has been issued, where it is in the construction
cycle, and whether or not a final inspection has been issued.
I
I
Councilman Antos offered that the supplement memo is
interesting in that in 1999 there was mostly minor plan
reviews with one Use Permit and by 2002 they are all
Conditional Use Permits. He said it seemed there was
considerable controversy with a request that was before the
Planning Commission at their last meeting, his feeling is
that there should be no more CUP's issued until the Code is
looked at, under the CUP process possibly the most egregious
example is the Oakwood Garden Apartments, there are five
hundred fifty units, it does not meet parking, is over
density, however taking the ten percent they could add the
equivalent of fifty-five or more units, that is high density
residential, it is in the Redevelopment Agency Project Area
yet that makes no difference. He said there are a number of
nonconforming properties that are over density, and with this
situation of more Use Permits rather than minor plan reviews
there is enlargement of a bedroom, addition of a bathroom,
that is significant additions to property, and in the opinion
of people living in the neighborhood it is said to be out of
character and should not be approved. Councilman Antos
requested that there be a moratorium on processing any
further requests until the Planning Commission and Council
have the opportunity to look at the Code sections and
determine whether or not, at least the major enlargements
under a CUP, should have a maximum allowed, possibly square
footage, rather than allow these requests to continue. He
mentioned having heard that possibly an appeal will be filed
on one or more of the approvals from the last Commission
meeting. Councilman Yost inquired if Councilman Antos was
going to appeal. The response of Councilman Antos was that
11-12-02
he was not, he was not at the Commission meeting, did not
testify, under the standing rule he was not standing to
testify, he submitted nothing in writing, made no comments,
those having standing would be anyone who attended the
meeting and testified either for or against the item or
participated in the hearing in some way. Councilmember
Campbell inquired if the desire is to have a moratorium on
those doing remodeling in Old Town. The response of
. I .
Counc~lman Antos was no, he wanted a morator~um on these
particular additions to nonconforming residential properties
until there is an opportunity to review this section of the
Code and determine whether or not the section that allows the
major alterations needs to be amended to include a maximum of
square footage or something similar. The Associate Planner
clarified that in relation to additions to properties the
number of units or density on the property is not allowed to
be increased, it is additions to existing unit count, as an
example, if there were three two-bedroom apartment units and
the request was to enlarge those under these provisions that
could be done yet there would still need to be three two-
bedroom units, the units could be made larger but no units
could be added, also, the Planning Commission has the ability
to approve or deny any request that comes before them
individually irregardless of what has happened in the past,
and confirmed that the Commission did approve two at their
last meet'ing. Councilman Antos noted that staff also makes
recommendations for approval, in the example of Oakwood he
stated tney would have the ability to add the equivalent of
fifty-five units, the square footage of fifty-five units,
turn a bachelor into a presidential suite yet remains a
bachelor unit, one bedroom.
I
Mayor Larson offered that there does not seem to be a great
number of these cases, he was not comfortable with changing
the ground rules absent an emergency, this is not the kind of
emergency from which the City would suffer greatly therefore
he would be opposed to the ordinance. Councilman Doane
expressed his opinion that the City has a very adequate
Planning :Commission, they are doing their job, history shows
that they have done their job, he sees no reason to change
the current procedure, it works well, the people understand
it, the proposal would merely complicate it further,
therefore he would be opposed to the ordinance. Councilman
Yost noted that the last issue similar to this that came
before the Council was'an appeal of a unit that was requested
to expand yet was nonconforming because of parking, that was
bothersome because his feeling was that the square footage
was being increased by adding a bathroom and by increasing
the size 'it is effectively increasing the density without
increasing the parking, in that case he was the sole vote
against it. Councilman Yost too said he did not see any
urgency in this matter even though he shares the concept,
however it may be of benefit to have a study session with the
Commission and Council to look at the density in terms of the
desire of where the community will be in the future, ,it
affects what the community will look like in five or ten
years, the way in which the community brings the City up to
Code is by virtue of this particular process, taking
nonconforming properties and making the new construction
conforming to the best of ability absent a CUP or public
hearing, he too does not see the need for an urgency
ordinance. Councilman Doane mentioned that there are three
persons on the Council that are former Planning
Commissioners, that is good training, when he steps down he
would recommend that his Commissioner take his place, he sees
I
I
11-12-02
no reason to impose a moratorium yet would support a study
session. Councilmember Campbell said if someone wants to
enlarge a unit to merely have more living space and not add
bedrooms, that is not increasing density, density is
increased when bedrooms are added, not when bathrooms are
added, she does not see the need for a moratorium.
I
Yost moved, second by Doane, to refer this matter to the
Planning Commission to conduct a study session.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
PUBLIC HEARING / RESOLUTION NUMBER 5079 - URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE - 2002
Mayor Larson declared the public hearing open to consider the
Urban Water Management Plan Update - 2002. The City Clerk
certified that the notice of public hearing was advertised as
required by law, and reported that no communications were
received relating to this matter. The Director of Public
Works reported that this item is the update of the Urban
Water Management Plan necessitated by changes in State law.
Mayor Larson invited members of the audience wishing to speak
to this item to come to the microphone and identify
themselves for the record. There being no public testimony,
Mayor Larson declared the public hearing closed.
I
Doane moved, second by Campbell, to adopt Resolution Number
5079 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT THE URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN." By unanimous consent, full reading of
Resolution Number 5079 was waived.
AYES:
NOES:
Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost
None Motion carried
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
No report was presented.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
The City Manager noted the first significant rainfall of the
season, the City came away unscathed except for the San
Gabriel River, he would encourage everyone to walk to the
River at which point they will understand why there is a
water quality problem, there were enough floatable items that
one could likely walk across the River. The Manager
expressed appreciation to the Chamber, particularly the
Masoners, for doing the cleanup of the Riverbed before the
first rainfall, that had a positive impact, they are also
cleaning the beaches. Councilman Yost noted that there is a
debris net as well, his Planning Commissioner said that would
never be obtained however it is on Coyote Creek and the San
Gabriel River, partially effective and likely does decrease
the amount of debris that reaches the beach.
I
COUNCIL COMMENTS
With regard to the additions to nonconforming properties
item, Councilman Antos asked if the study session would be at
the Commission level or a joint session. Mayor Larson stated
his understanding of the motion was to refer to the Planning
Commission for their recommendation as to a further study
session. Councilman Doane said he had intended an item for
consideration however that changed as a result of the
election, he has a concern with the fact that there are three
vacancies in the Police Department, his intent had been to
11-12-02 / 11-25-02
recommend that the City hire at least one officer to fill a
vacancy, that was based on what he had thought would be some
additional revenue, but for some reason this City, at the
last election, determined that Measure EE was not good
however all it would have done was generate some revenue that
would have been paid by visitors to the City, would have no
impact on the residents, he was amazed that Measure EE
failed. He noted that there is still police coverage, the
officers are working overtime, yet the money must come from
some place, the three people in the north of the City are not
trying to bankrupt the City, it appears it is the City that
is trying to bankrupt itself by not approving good, solid
revenue enhancements such as that with Measure EE. Mayor
Larson agreed, stating that he would be hard put to place
anything else on the ballot that would bring income to the
City. Mayor Larson expressed appreciation to the Chamber of
Commerce, the Commander of the Naval Weapons Station, the
Marine Corps Colonel, the Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Youth Jazz
Band, the Police Volunteers, and everyone who undertook the
Veterans Day Program at Eisenhower Park, thanks to the
military for taking the time to send their people, and the
Marine Honor Guard who presented the colors and then stood at
attention for the entire hour, there was a good, enthusiastic
crowd. Councilmember Campbell noted that it was the Veterans
of Foreign Wars and American Legion that hosted the memorial
service, the gentlemen that performed the twenty-one gun
salute also stood at attention.
I
CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session was held.
ADJOURNMENT
The direction of Council was that the November 25th canceled
meeting be adjourned until December 9th at 6:30 p.m. to meet
in Closed Session. It was the order of the Chair, with
consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 p.m.
I
clerk
Approved:
Attest:
Seal Beach, California
November 25, 2002
I
The regular City Council meeting scheduled for this date
canceled by direction of the City Council in recognition
the Thanksgiving holiday.
was
of