The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC Min 1999-04-12 3-22-99 I 4-12-99 issues with regard to the expansion of the Ganall Lumber facility and the addition of Plow Boys. I CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 (c) and (b), to discuss the items identified on the agenda, a conference with legal counsel with regard to one potential case of initiation of litigation and three potential cases of anticipated litigation. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn to Closed Session at 8:36 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:33 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported the Council had met in Closed Session to discuss the items identified on the agenda, gave direction with respect to two of the matters, no other action was taken. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 9:34 p.m. Attest: 9:;or I Approved: Seal Beach, California April 12, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:01 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. I The Pledge of Allegiance was led by five members of Boy Scout Troop 642. Counci1member Campbell announced that this is a Seal Beach Troop, founded by College Park East resident Dr. Hood, she introduced each of the Scouts including one young man who is an Eagle Scout candidate and has just completed his Eagle project in College Park East. Councilmember Campbell presented each Scout with a commemorative Seal Beach pin, and thanked the Troop for their participation. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Absent: None 4-12-99 Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mr. Badum, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Chief Sellers, Police Department Ms. Stoddard, Director of Administrative Services Mr. Dorsey, Assistant to the City Manager Ms. Beard, Director of Recreation and Parks Mr. Dancs, Assistant City Engineer Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk I APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilman Boyd requested Item "G" removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration, and Councilmember Campbell requested that Items "J" and "L" be removed, and requested that the agenda be amended to consider authorization of the preparation of a letter relating to issues as a result of her recent Washington, D. C. trip. Given the fact that the matter came up subsequent to the posting of the agenda, the City Attorney advised that the agenda may be amended by a four-fifths vote of the Council. Yost moved, second by Doane, to include the request of Councilmember Campbell for preparation of a letter, added to the agenda under the category of Council Items. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I Mayor Yost requested that Item "M" be removed from the Consent Calendar as well. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to approve the order of the agenda as revised. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PRESENTATIONS EMPLOYEE RECOGNITIONS The Director of Public Works introduced and recognized Mr. George Bernard, a twenty year employee in the capacity of electrician and presently as an assistant in the Public Works Administrative department, Mr. Bill Moran, a nearly twenty- one year employee serving as a City electrician the duties of which include traffic signals, water system motors, pumps, etc., and Mr. Steve "Slick" Stockett, a thirty year employee and presently a Public Works Supervisor. Mayor Yost presented each with a commemorative City tile plaque in I appreciation for their services to the community. At the request of Councilmember Campbell, Mr. Stockett recalled that in preparation for the pier reopening dedication ceremony, the cement base for the bronze seal was poured too late in the day, he volunteered to oversee the statue throughout the night, the local press did an article, took pictures, and tagged the seal statue with his nickname, "Slick." PROCLAMATION The Council proclaimed May 8th, 1999 as "Fire Service Recognition Day" and Councilman Boyd presented the 4-12-99 Proclamation to Battalion Chief Bill Bundy who accepted the recognition with appreciation and extended an invitation to all to visit the Fire Stations on the 8th. I PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Yost declared Public Comments open. Dr. Rosenman, 8th Street, directed the attention of Council to a conference announcement for May 1st, 1999 presented by the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council on the subject of storm waters. He suggested that consideration be given to authorizing attendance of members of the Environmental Quality Control Board and City Council. There being no other speakers, Mayor Yost declared Public Comments closed. COUNCIL ITEMS I BUDGET CALENDAR The City Manager noted a proposed budget calendar for the upcoming 1999/2000 fiscal year, the calendar providing an additional period of time for any Council workshops that may be desired. He pointed out that the budget process began about February commencing with projections for estimated revenues, by the end of this month there should be a projection of ending expenditures for the current fiscal year which is a basis for expenditures in the upcoming year, there is review of the next fiscal year of the Capital Improvement budget, anticipated sales tax from the Towne Center when it opens is being looked at in terms of capital improvements that have been deferred for years. The Manager noted that the period from April 23rd through May 23rd is primarily for budget workshops. Councilman Boyd mentioned that the suggestion of staff was that the Council provide a list of persons interested in the budget process, based upon past inquiries or discussions, relative to capital improvement scheduling or other budget matters, who would be invited to participate in the public budget workshops. Noting again the public workshop period from April 23rd to May 23rd and submittal of the recommended budget to Council on May 24th, Councilman Boyd recommended that the budget process commence on April 26th at the Council level for discussion of possibly two or three cost centers at each regular meeting thereafter, a set aside of time for that purpose of about thirty to forty-five minutes, that would increase public participation and home viewing, that in lieu of submitting names of interested persons from the Council district. Mayor Yost said he would not object so long as this would not overburden the agenda process. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to commence budget discussions at the April 26th meeting, starting with an overview of revenues and expenditures in summary with a recommendation from the Manager based upon the Strategic Financial Plan, then look at the individual cost centers. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried LEGISLATION - SB 216 and AB 1355 - SAN GABRIEL RIVER CONSERVANCY Mayor Yost reported that he and Councilmember Campbell attended a Gateway Cities meeting of cities in the watershed area of Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers, SB 216 and AB 1355 are pending before the State legislature to deal with the watershed of the San Gabriel River. He mentioned that neither bill provides for representation for Orange County even though there are ten cities in the County that are 4-12-99 affected by both bills, there is also no provision for water quality or pollution that ends up in the River, also no language addressing any beach impact or cleanup issues, these concerns were brought to the League of Cities and the cities represented at that meeting, the Orange County League has agreed to write a letter as will Seal Beach, and the Surfrider Foundation has agreed to do so as well. Mayor Yost said this item is simply an approval to send letters to the authors of those bills advising that there are three things that needs to be done, that there needs to be provision for Orange County representation inasmuch as it affects ten cities, a request for at least three seats on any Conservancy, that water quality concerns need to be addressed, the condition of the beach and beach cleanup as well. With regard to gaining two or three seats on the governing board, Councilmember Campbell suggested that one of those be a representative of Seal Beach, noted that both of the bills address Long Beach as being at the mouth of the San Gabriel River, having representation on the board, yet it is Seal Beach who lies downstream, also at the mouth of the River, and is the recipient of the majority of debris, at the recent meeting the attendees unanimously agreed that Seal Beach should be a member of the Conservancy, and pointed out that this does not merely include the cities along the San Gabriel but the tributaries thereto constituting the watershed. Mayor Yost noted that there was some concern as to when the Conservancy usurps the rights of individual cities when it comes to planning, zoning, and other regulations, the interests of Seal Beach are quite different than that. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to approve the outline for the preparation of letters over the signature of the Mayor to be forwarded to the local State legislators, the letters to include the request for Seal Beach representation. I I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried REQUEST - BUDGET AMENDMENT - PIER RESTROOM PROJECT Councilman Boyd made reference to the current project to retrofit and restore the pier restrooms, his contention is that if a public works project is to be done it should be done once, done right, and complete, the restroom project fails to meet one of those goals. He noted that there is severe structural damage at the base of the pier, this has existed for some years, the area is fenced off, the location is where there is an arching of the pier and one can walk from one side to the other, in the last section of concrete there is spalling, which is deterioration of the concrete. When the Council considered restoration of the restrooms, there was not consideration given to any pier structural damage in that area, the pylons, the spalling, and provided pictures of the area. Councilman Boyd suggested that the Council move forward with an amendment to the project budget, the cost of the repairs is presently uncertain, so that I repairs can be made to the entire area. The Director of Public Works noted that the Council has approved a contract for an outside structural engineer to inspect the pier, the estimate of cost was somewhere between $25,000 to $40,000 depending upon the amount of damage that is uncovered, in that as the deteriorated concrete is removed more may be found. Councilman Doane asked if this was not part of the Main Street Specific Plan, did the architects not include such repair, to which the Director said the repair was not included in that project, the restrooms were actually a stand alone project with the intent to get them operational, in 4-12-99 I fact the pier damage in the vicinity of the restrooms is relatively minor, the more extensive damage is in the span outside the restroom area and closest to the ocean, somewhat substantial damage in the columns that has to be dealt with, that was not included in the restroom project program. The Manager said that the Main Street Plan included and provided that proposals would be solicited from vendors for a small beach oriented business beneath the pier, to provide improvements and construct that facility, at that point the kind of structural improvements that would need to be done had not been evaluated, that could have been negotiated if the Council had chosen to seek proposals from private concessionaires. Councilman Boyd countered that it was not the intent of the Councilor at least not his intent as the representative of this district, to put a concession below the pier. Councilman Snow inquired if it is possible to gunite the areas where there is spalling, or another means, to which the Director responded that the consultant looked at that, the process that will be recommended is essentially digging around the existing rebar, blasting and cleaning for rust, recoating with an epoxy type material, bonding the surface, forming and injecting, gunite is an alternative that was also recommended however that could be a problem depending upon the operator of the equipment. Mayor Yost inquired as to what this would do to the time frame for the restroom project in that the Council had requested they be open for the summer season. The Director said he was uncertain as to an exact time frame in that once it is started it is not known how extensive the repairs will be, a guess would be one to two months, acknowledging that the restrooms could be opened and this repair done separately, of concern would be such activity in the area closer to summer. Councilman Snow inquired as to the age of the concrete, the response was likely sixty to sixty-five years, to that Councilman Snow said this is the first time he has seen reinforcement bar of this type, the Director explaining that some of that is from the buildings that were formerly in that location. The Mayor noted that this request would be an unbudgeted item. The City Manager stated the intent was to take the Main Street projects in phases, this repair would require a budget amendment, acknowledged it is something that needs to be dealt with, the idea is to methodically move towards getting the entire area improved and the deferred maintenance taken care of, in his opinion it is unrealistic to think that all of this work could be done in a month or month and a half, that because it has not been determined exactly what approach to take, there is also specifications and the bid process, there may be some funding sources that could be looked at in the meantime, the intent was to place this repair in the capital budget for the upcoming fiscal year with a start sometime in the fall. Councilman Doane said keeping in mind that this is a high priority it may be well to make this project a budget proposal that will be looked at in the next few months. The Mayor agreed, finish and open the restrooms then tackle this problem. Councilman Boyd reiterated his preference that if a project is to be done it should be done right and at one time, this should have been included with the restroom project yet it was not taken to that extent, his belief is that there is enough money in the capital budget from projects that have been delayed or deleted that could be utilized instead of doing a budget amendment for this repair, yet, it is not his intent to draw down reserves for this. He said if it is the desire of the Council to hold this over until fall that will be okay, the Council was assured that the restrooms would be I I 4-12-99 open for Spring break, that has passed, they are likely up to a month behind, and when something is delayed it is always another year given the fact that things are held over during the fall and winter because it is the rainy season, bids are called for in the fall, then it is winter, the delay usually another year. Councilmember Campbell expressed concern with integrity, the comment was made that it is no known what is I needed until one can view the damage, yet if there is substantial damage it can not be ignored, if there is something wrong the Council needs to know and fix it. Councilman Boyd said his motion would be to request staff to determine the cost of repair, the estimate being between $25,000 to $40,000, authorize staff to seek bids, rough bids, from three reputable contractors who have experience with this type of work, and present them to Council at the next meeting if possible, the cost and length of time to complete the repair from start to finish, it may be six rather than two months or two weeks. In reference to the pictures provided, Councilman Doane asked if any are in the restroom area, to which Councilman Boyd responded there were two. The Director stated that the areas reflected in the pictures will be repaired as part of the restroom contract. Councilman Boyd said if it is planned that they be fixed then questioned why they were painted over. The Director said that was something the contractor had done, in-house staff will be used for that repair, the intent with this project was to try to use in-house staff, and the reason for the range of cost for the spalling is because it is a time and material project, again, the actual cost will not be known until the project is done, it is known however that the structure is I not falling down, the repair is more cosmetic, the engineers have assured that structurally it is save, a fire truck could be run upon the pier, probably not a lot of excess equipment, however it is safe. Councilman Doane stated he is not opposed to the proposal yet would not want to see the repairs to the pier in any way postpone the restroom completion. Mayor Yost expressed his opinion that this repair should fall in line with the other needed projects, it is not budgeted, he would not want to use staff time to seek bids before the next meeting, budget hearings for next fiscal year are forthcoming, this will require additional staff time, suggesting that for now efforts be directed to getting the restrooms open. The Manager offered that once the Council receives the upcoming budget materials and has opportunity to compare this project with the other capital projects, including funds available, if this is felt to be a high priority bids could be sought immediately in the fiscal year rather than waiting until early fall. It was clarified that the intent then would be to separate the pier repairs from the restroom project, that the restrooms be operable for the summer season, the pier then considered for the next budget. Councilman Boyd pointed out that the Capital Improvement Project list is for a five year span, it can be seen where I the pier repair would fall in that list, his contention is that $200,000 is being spent for the pier restrooms then a chain link fence will be placed around the area under discussion, as it was for the past nine years. Councilman Boyd moved to direct staff to seek rough estimates from three reputable contractors having experience is this type of work/repair, that information to be provided to the Council at the next meeting for further consideration. Councilmember Campbell seconded the motion. 4-12-99 AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Yost Motion carried I REQUEST - COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - REVENUE AUGMENTATION - TIDELAND BEACH FUND - BEACH CLEANUP In dealing with issues relating to the beach, Councilman Boyd said he has become aware that there are other cities, specifically the City of Long Beach, that receive funding in the form of revenue augmentation from the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors for beach cleaning. Long Beach receives $500,000 per year from Los Angeles County to aid with their beach cleaning as a result of the San Gabriel and Los Angeles Rivers, yet Seal Beach is the last stop for the San Gabriel, most of the downstream debris does not flow around the jetty into Alamitos Bay or onto their beaches, rather, it ends up on the Seal Beach beach. Councilman Boyd said in talking with the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Don Knabe, and staff, it was determined that a written request could be made to the Board for augmentation funds specifically for beach cleanup, Long Beach has seven miles of beaches, it is believed that the calculation is about $63,200 per mile. He requested that staff be directed to draft a letter requesting, but not limited to, expenses for beach cleaning operations with a five year history, total tonnage removed from the beach as well as storms and unforeseen rainfall events, and a report with as much detail as possible of the cost of a beach closure. I Councilman Boyd moved to direct staff to prepare such request for an amount within reason of about $125,000 to $130,000 for the approximate two miles of beach in Seal Beach. It was said that the Los Angeles River impacts Long Beach but the San Gabriel really does not, to which the comment was made that Long Beach believes the San Gabriel does. It was mentioned that Long Beach has been receiving this monetary assistance for more than a decade, and Seal Beach is in need of a new beach rake, sanitizer, etc. Councilman Doane seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I FUNDING REQUEST - LOS ALAMITOS AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER Councilmember Campbell noted that the recent trip to Washington, D. C. was specific to lobby for the El Toro facility reuse as an airport, also, funding for the Los Alamitos Control Tower for another year. She requested that a letter be prepared to Congressman Rohrabacher seeking approximately $1 million to fund the operation of the Tower for the upcoming year, and that the Congressman in turn write to the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee to request a line item for that operation, and although the deadline for such request has past it is hoped that the Congressman can assist. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to direct staff to prepare a letter as requested. Councilmember Campbell requested that the letter be forwarded by the upcoming Friday. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried 4-12-99 CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "E-1" thru "M" Boyd moved, second by Snow, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except Items "G, J, L, and M". E-1. 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 F. Adopted Resolution Number 4700 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 4678 TO REVISE THE REPRESENTATION TO THE WEST ORANGE COUNTY WATER BOARD." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4700 was waived. H. Approved the minutes of the February 8th and February 22nd, 1999 regular sessions, and the March 2nd, 1999 regular adjourned session. I. Authorized the Mayor to sign a letter to the Orange County Historical Commission and the California Office of Historic Preservation in support of the efforts of the U. S. Submarine Veterans of World War II in designating the Submarine Memorial at the Naval Weapons Facility, Seal Beach, as an historical site. I K. Accepted the resignation of Ms. Sonia Johnston as the District Two appointee to the Archaeological Advisory Committee, and deemed the position to be vacant for the unexpired term ending July, 1999. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "G" - DEMANDS Councilman Boyd noted that the warrant list shows specific check numbers with the amounts set forth for each, and requested that year to date totals be included on the agenda as are the warrant and payroll totals. Councilmember Campbell said of more interest to her would be expenditures for the specific expense code or account. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the request for a year to date I expenditure figure to be shown on future agendas. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried RESPONSE LETTER - LEAF BLOWER POLLUTION HAZARDS Councilmember Campbell requested to be provided a copy of the Orange County Grand Jury Report relating to leaf blower pollution hazards prior to taking action on this item. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to hold this item over pending receipt of the Grand Jury Report as requested. 4-12-99 AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I TRAFFIC SAFETY OFFICER REQUEST In reference to the fiscal impact, Councilmember Campbell noted the availability of sufficient funds for initial implementation in this fiscal year due to short term salary savings from recent staffing shortages, and that future costs will be offset through revenue generated from traffic violator fines, to which she expressed some concern with the budget process. The City Manager said if the recruitment is started by mid-April someone may be on staff by mid-June, with only a couple of weeks until fiscal year end, possibly bring in a lateral officer that has already been trained, and it is certain there will be enough citation revenue to cover the first month of the fiscal year. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to authorize the Police Department to hire an additional motorcycle officer utilizing existing budget resources. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I RESPONSE LETTER - DRAFT GROUNDWATER MONITORING STUDY - NAVAL WEAPONS STATION SITES Mayor Yost reported receiving calls relating to the news article regarding the plume originating from the Weapons Station, those persons had the impression that the City would be doing nothing about it for some ten years, his intent is to assure people that the City is taking an active interest in the matter, to questions as to what they could do, he has requested the addresses of the various organizations to which people can write which he will post on his web site. Councilmember Campbell asked if this is something the Restoration Advisory Board is working on, to that the Manager advised it is the Orange County Water District, also, Councilmember Boyd reported that the representative to the Metropolitan Water District indicated concern as well and the District will be monitoring and maintaining continued contact with regards to this issue. The Director of Development Services confirmed that the Restoration Advisory Board is monitoring as well. Yost moved, second by Boyd, to authorize the Mayor to sign the response letter with regard to the Draft Groundwater Monitoring Study at IR Sites 1 and 7, Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY - EQUITY STUDY The City Manager stated this item pertains to a long standing issue of equities among Orange County Fire Authority member agencies, a lengthy study by a fiscal consultant to determine which cities are under paying or over paying, Seal Beach fell within a range that deems this City is paying its fair share, slightly underpaying by less than ten percent, of concern is that if this study and recommendations are implemented there may be a withdrawal of members of the Fire Authority. The Manager noted that he and Councilman Boyd have been participants in this for some time and a conclusion has been drawn that in the interest of preserving the Authority in its present strength it would be best to simply receive and file the report. Councilman Boyd presented a background of the 4-12-99 Fire Authority, an independent agency of the County, Seal Beach being a contract city with the Authority, all of the member agencies, including the County, pay for services by two means, a cash contract as is Seal Beach, or as structural fire fund members through the payment of property taxes, the amount that is determined necessary to provide those services sometimes exceeds or is below the amount contributed by the I structural fire fund city, Irvine is an example where their property values are high, their population exceeds the demands for services, they are a donor city whereby they contribute $3.6 million too much into the Fire Authority annually. When the Authority was formed there was a call for an equity study, and although it is general consensus that this may have been a good exercise it is uncertain whether the money paid into the structural fire fund can actually be returned to the cities that have overpaid. In all, to implement the Fire Equity Study as presented does not address all of the far reaching issues that would be caused by doing so, of great concern is that the integrity of the organization be assured, the twenty-two cities and incorporated areas that are served by the Authority. Councilman Boyd requested direction of the Council, he and the City Manager have come to consensus that a letter should be forwarded to the Chairman of the Authority suggesting that three things be done, that there be a minimum five to seven year commitment to maintain a seat on the Board, that the Equity Report be received and filed, and that a future needs assessment based on growth and population increases be completed, that to address some of the concerns of the donor cities. Councilman Boyd made a comparison to the purchase of a home before and after Proposition 13, differences in the I amount of taxes for equal services, pointed out that there is an inequity in the State with regard to taxation, that will need to be addressed at the State level, not through the Fire Authority. Councilman Boyd requested authorization to forward the letter to the Fire Authority Chairman and to vote his conscience as a member of the Authority Board. Doane moved, second by Boyd, to authorize that the referenced letter be forwarded recommending that the Orange County Fire Authority Board of Directors table the Equity Plan, and direct the City's representative on the Board to represent this position at future Board meetings. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD/ WESTMINSTER AVENUE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS - PROJECT NUMBER 665 The Director of Public Works explained that this is a request to enter into an Engineering Services Agreement with Tetra Tech, Inc. to provide the first of a two phase project to improve the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and I Westminster Avenue. He noted that as previously identified in the Traffic Impact Report of 1990/91 and more recently confirmed by the Bixby EIR Traffic Study, the intersection is operating at a lesser capacity than it should. He pointed out that this project is being funded in two phases as there were two opportunities to obtain OCTA funding, the projects one hundred percent funded by Measure M, and will improve the capacity of the intersection. He pointed out that the first phase includes an additional southbound left turn on Seal Beach Boulevard, a total changeout of the existing signals, this system needs to be tied in to the rest of the system and 4-12-99 I ultimately tied into the Kitts Highway intersection. As to the second phase, that has actually not been determined nor is the Council being requested to approve phase two at this time. The approach to this project was to investigate the intersection further, determine what is really needed through a more exact engineering analysis, and then come back within the next year or so with a proposal for phase two. Mayor Yost inquired if any Bixby mitigation monies go towards this project, to which the Director explained that this intersection was substantially below capacity before the Bixby project, that project may have made the capacity worse by a minor amount, and since Measure M monies are covering this project there will be no need to use Traffic Impact Fees to improve the intersection, that allows taking all of the Impact Fees received from the Bixby project and put them towards the overcrossing project, that is a substantial match of about $1.6 million total. He confirmed that these are not discretionary General Fund monies, rather Measure M funds that can only be used for streets and roadways. With specific reference to phase two, Councilman Doane asked how traffic will be handled when the actual improvements are being made. The Director stated that traffic will improve greatly, one of the deficiencies that was not identified in the preliminary report is the east and westbound movements on Westminster, it is presently not certain exactly what will be required however what is envisioned is the widening of an additional lane in each direction approaching and leaving the intersection in order to improve the capacity as well as additional space for turn movements, there may also be a need to acquire small amounts of right of way, that too would be funded by Measure M, the whole idea is to improve traffic at that intersection and make it safer, the second phase will also include an analysis of the alignment south of the intersection on Seal Beach Boulevard. To an inquiry of Councilman Doane, the Director responded that the thought is to widen the roadway at the intersection, with regard to working with the Navy for property acquisition, the response was that that may not be necessary as a portion of that parcel is an easement of the Sanitation District and it is felt they will work with the City, there is additional right- of-way that is available easterly of the intersection, more so than westerly, the west side would likely be the area where most right-of-way difficulties may occur. Councilman Boyd expressed concern with this proposal for the reason that he did not feel there is much wrong with the subject intersection, he as well as the residents drive it frequently, this is the type of project that takes considerable time and energy of City staff that could be better and more meaningfully spent on projects within the City that affect the residents directly rather than those who use Westminster and Seal Beach Boulevard as alternate routes to their homes. He said he understands that the project is totally funded by Measure M yet that does not alleviate his concerns with regard to staff. An issue mentioned was capacity, his opinion remains that it is felt the Boulevard functions quite well with the exception of the area of the overpass near Lampson Avenue. His concern is that the City improve the signalization, replaced with equipment that eliminates median traffic or collision hazards, specifically the signals in the median area, again, he would not like to see a significant expenditure of time and energy that would not be a true benefit to the City, his feeling is that the people are not looking to increase the capacity of City streets. In response to a question from Councilman Boyd as to funding, the Director stated that phase one is about I I 4-12-99 $290,000, phase two, which will vary depending on the right- of-way, $600,000. Councilman Boyd said he finds it difficult to understand that that intersection needs $900,000 of improvements other than new signals, removal of the concrete medians replaced by some landscaping. Councilman Doane noted that there is no traffic problem mid-afternoon yet with rush hour there is considerable commuter traffic that travels Westminster, when there are problems on the freeway, as an example, Westminster does become impacted to the point that it takes more than one signal cycle to get through the intersection. Councilman Snow said he has observed this intersection many times, agreed that the signal system should be improved, however he could not envision how the lanes can be widened or a lane added without encroachment onto property such as the filling stations. Councilmember Campbell recalled that when the railroad tracks were removed that resulted in the sewer lines needing to be replaced, this City has an aged infrastructure, in this case widening of the intersection may again cause a sewer line problem, and asked what such replacement might cost. The Director advised that there is a project presently planned to replace that line from the County pump station at Westminster back to Lopez Drive, it is anticipated that bids will be sought sometime in the next fiscal year, the City is fortunate also to have obtained a grant to pave that entire length of roadway as well. The Mayor mentioned that it has been some time since staff has been requested to apply for grant monies so that funds are realized from outside the General Fund for needed projects, in this case application was made and funds will be awarded to do this project, yet now the Council is questioning whether the project should be done, to that Councilman Boyd said he did not recall directing the staff to pursue this project or its funding. The Director explained that this project was identified, along with other intersections, when the City did the Traffic Impact Study for fair share and impact fees, these are peak operational problems, sooner or later they will become greater problems. He noted that the funds could be returned, yet reminded that if they are the monies can not be used for any other purpose. Councilman Doane offered that he was not opposed, also, it is part of the traffic mitigation that will impact Seal Beach Boulevard when Hellman is developed and Bixby goes in, the Boulevard will then be more crowded, the only time it becomes a problem is when the traffic hits an intersection, there is question with widening as to where that land will come from in that it can not be taken away from the service stations or the sidewalks, if land could be obtained from the Weapons Station then he could see no reason to not follow through with the project. The Manager said he believed most of the questions will be answered by the first phase. The Director added that part of the phase one work is to more clearly identify exactly what is needed, it is suspected that additional through lanes are required however it has not been determined how much space will actually be needed, it is anticipated that a small portion, possibly ten feet or so on each side may be required, no matter what design is chosen every effort will be made to keep it at minimum, the desire would be to not impact the businesses or pay considerable monies for right-of-way. Question was posed if the concentration is on Seal Beach Boulevard rather than Westminster. The Director explained that they are tied together, citing as an example, if one is traveling north or southbound on the Boulevard during peak hours and there is substantial traffic on Westminster there will be a longer wait at the traffic signal on the Boulevard as the volume is I I I 4-12-99 I r~s~ng every day, therefore if the intersection remains at the same capacity the amount of green time on the through move on Westminster will need to be raised, becoming an inordinate amount of wait time on the Boulevard, the higher capacity on Westminster will make the red through time shorter on the Boulevard, the same on Westminster. Councilmember Campbell offered that when the bridge is widened it will be done from the east as there is insufficient area to the west, currently, as one goes north on the Boulevard past Leisure World the right lane becomes a right turn only lane, inquiring if, when the bridge is widened, will there be three through lanes plus one right turn only lane onto the freeway. That was indicated as being the understanding, three through lanes on either side. Councilmember Campbell mentioned that then some area will need to be taken from the Weapons Station and of concern as well is the drainage channel. Councilman Boyd said this is not specific to Bixby, the issue is capacity, said that there is need to increase the capacity of the intersection, yet the population is not growing so who is being served by doing this project, it is not someone who lives in this City, staff contention is that there are so many projects, not enough time or help, therefore he suggested that staff be redirected to projects that are more meaningful to the residents of the City. Councilman Doane countered that the comment is somewhat shortsighted in referencing the City, forgetting that there is College Park East, West, and Leisure World. To that Councilman Boyd responded that he was not, that by decreasing the intersection it decreases pollution and traffic, if the capacity of that intersection continues to be increased to accommodate the growth around this City people will tend to use these roadways as an alternative route, if people come here to live, work, or shop that is one thing, to just travel through and provide no benefit is another. A question was posed as to those residents who travel daily to school, work, etc. on the Boulevard, also what is entailed in each phase. The Director explained that the first phase is the engineering work, replace the signals, tie Kitts Highway signal to the Boulevard/Westminster, and an additional southbound left turn lane that was previously identified in reports and needed as part of the Bixby project, phase two would be improving the capacity of the Westminster through move and turn movement which may require additional right-of- way and may impact the storm drain whereby some modifications would be required, that a reason for the greater cost, this portion needs to be looked at in more depth. Given the mention of straightening the curve on Seal Beach Boulevard, question was if that is phase one or two, the response of the Director was phase two, phase one will look at the conceptual plan, the design for phase two will not occur until staff returns to Council with a proposal, at this point phase one will look at the improvements as a concept only, what will go forward will be the plans and specifications, actually to be built, will be the southbound left turn lane on Seal Beach Boulevard and total replacement of the traffic signals, including removal of the median poles. Question again, both phase one and two will be funded by Measure M money, response was affirmative, pointed out also that this money is not available for small street projects, rather major arterial projects, also, objection was raised as to the amount of staff time being expended for these projects, a considerable expense to the City. Councilman Boyd moved to deny the recommendation to approve the professional engineering services agreement with Tetra I I 4-12-99 Tech, Inc. in the amount of $40,000 for Westminster Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard, however direct staff to secure Measure M funding for new and improved signals and to continue landscape design for the medians that are currently not landscaped. Councilmember Campbell seconded the motion. Councilman Snow inquired if staff is in agreement with the motion to improve this intersection, the response of the Director was that from an engineering viewpoint this intersection has been identified in previous engineering reports, this is a means to satisfy the Traffic Impact Report. Councilman Boyd asked how many other similar intersection improvement projects there are, as identified in the 1991/92 report. The Director reported that funding has been approved for the overcrossing, recalled that other projects were Pacific Coast Highway/Seal Beach Boulevard, Balboa/12th Street/Pacific Coast Highway, the intersections at the 405 ramp, about seven or eight intersections in all, and confirmed again that funding has been approved for the 405 overpass and this project. I Vote on the motion to deny recommendation: AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Snow Doane, Yost Motion carried The Public works Director advised that the funding can not be used for median strips or signals alone therefore the funding will need to be returned. It was confirmed again to Councilman Boyd that the funding can not be used for signals alone, explained that the funds are meant to improve capacity, part of that is signal improvements, in order to alter the funding package it would be necessary to drop out and reapply in the next cycle, which is about one and a half to two years. Councilman Snow stated he had not been aware that the Measure M funding had been approved, to that question was posed if there was then an intent to reconsider the vote. I Boyd moved, second by Snow, to reconsider the prior action. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried Snow moved, second by Doane, to approve the Professional Services Agreement with Tetra Tech, Inc. to provide planning, environmental, and professional engineering services in conjunction with the City's planned Seal Beach Boulevard/Westminster Avenue Intersection Improvement, Project Number 665, the cost not to exceed $40,000, and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. AYES: NOES: Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost Boyd Motion carried I STATE FUNDING REQUESTS - BIKEWAY / WATER QUALITY / ANAHEIM BAY CHANNEL Mayor Yost noted that this item relates to a funding request for capital improvement projects for the bikepath on Marina Drive, connecting with the Regional Bikepath through Sunset Beach and Huntington Beach, monies to reduce Marina from four to two lanes with a center median, Councilman Boyd has been helpful in pursuing this with the State legislators, and although this has yet to be funded the efforts will continue. The Public Works Director first mentioned that staff has in 4-12-99 I fact forwarded this request to Sacramento. He pointed out that what is being sought is about $650,000 for a Seal Beach Regional Bikeway, to which he showed a diagram of the Santa Ana River and San Gabriel River trails, in between an off- road trail that essentially ends at Sunset Beach, the plan is to continue that trail along Pacific Coast Highway, down Seal Beach Boulevard into downtown Seal Beach, then tie into the San Gabriel River trail, and clarified that the Class I trail ends at Sunset where it becomes a striped bike lane to Anderson Street. The first phase of this project would be from Anderson to Seal Beach Boulevard and then tie into the Electric Avenue Greenbelt, from there to Marina Drive where the on-street bike lane will be restriped, then tie into the new Marina Bridge and the San Gabriel River trail. He noted that the Marina Drive project will involve storm drains in addition to the bike lane, mentioning also that there needs to be some extensive work to tie this into the greenbelt, yet it was felt the cost would not be accepted at the State legislature level, which could run a few million dollars for just that project, sources of funding for that project are being looked at, OCTA has expressed some interest in assisting, it was felt that at this point the most cost effective and successful project now would be the Coast Highway bikeway segment in that it requires State support, thus far support has been received from the local CalTrans District Twelve, and with the help of Councilman Boyd, Supervisor Silva as well. It was pointed out that legislation is being carried by Assemblyman Baugh. The Director tracked the bikeway for the purpose of information, from Anderson Street an on-street trail on the southerly shoulder of the roadway adjacent to Surfside, the bridge cantilevered along the existing bridge, likely of plank, and then a meandering trail through the remainder of residual right-of-way along Coast Highway to Kitts Highway, at that point building another small bridge and probably utilize the old abutments from the railway bridge, the bikeway will then go down Seal Beach Boulevard and tie into Electric to complete the link. He brought to attention the fact that there is presently no such facility on the Highway, there are joggers, bicyclists, traffic at high speed, and continued to show a mock-up of the conceptual appearance of this bikeway, from Anderson Street westerly the curb would be extended out for what can be described as a sidewalk bikeway, along Surfside the proposal would be to move the traffic lanes towards the inland side to provide extra space with a concrete barrier to separate a Class I bikeway from the highway, further west would be the meandering trail with a small greenbelt which would improve that area substantially. The Director mentioned also a request for $350,000 for water quality purposes, proposing some type of boom structure for the San Gabriel River and funding for additional beach cleaning if possible, the last project relates to removal of concrete debris and rubble that remains from the former bridge over the Anaheim Bay Channel, State funds are being sought since this was once a State highway bridge. Question was posed if that bridge was downed during the 1933 earthquake, the responses were that the existing bridge was constructed in 1969, the old bridge was demolished by the Navy in 1967 or 1968. Councilman Boyd commended staff for their efforts to put this funding request together, this in response to a call from Assemblyman Baugh on Thursday, the packet was in his office by the following Wednesday, it is hoped that Senator Ross Johnson will lend his support as well. He said to his knowledge this is one of the most significant requests that Seal Beach has ever made to the I I 4-12-99 State legislature, he would suggest a trip to Sacramento with members of staff to visit with certain members of the legislature, and would request that that be included in the motion to receive and file. Mayor Yost said he would like to see an addendum to include something for Marina to assure that it goes from four to two lanes, especially if money is spent for travel to Sacramento. Councilman Boyd noted that Friday was the deadline for legislator requests, will then be considered by budget sub-committees probably in the next thirty days, then by the end of Mayor June the budget will be on the Governor's desk. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to receive and file the report relating to the State funding request. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to declare a recess at 8:40 p.m., the Council reconvened at 8:50 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. MARINA DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - BRIDGE TYPE SELECTION The Public Works Director stated that the Bridge Type Selection Report, a standard CalTrans report, basically sets the design of the bridge replacement over the San Gabriel River on Marina Drive, to this additional information has been included regarding the structure type, configuration of the traffic lanes, and type of construction. The structure type is basically a cast in place, pre-stressed box girder structure, similar to freeway bridges with clean lines, sealed top, bottom and sides for a nice appearance, standard I piles are proposed as they work better in this situation and are easier to construct, as to the traffic configuration, the traffic analysis identifies that the existing lane capacity is more than is required, a smaller volume of vehicles using this bridge was identified, therefore the cost of the bridge can be reduced by building a smaller bridge and upgrading the pedestrian and bicycle facilities which are important in the area given the connection to the San Gabriel River bike trail as well as a major connection to Old Town, Long Beach, and the commercial uses in the area. As to the type of construction, the Director said there are basically two ways to build the bridge, either close the bridge and proceed with construction, or, construct the facility in phases, keeping one or two lanes open, it is uncertain whether it is possible to keep the lanes open however may be a possibility if there is no pedestrian or bicycle access, the difference in cost is about $1 million and an approximate additional year of construction. The Report recommends closure of the bridge for construction, since it is in a substantial drainage area work can not be done in the riverbed from fall until spring during the rainy season, that shortens the time available for construction. He noted that the consultant has determined that the bridge could be demolished, then construct the I structure that is in the streambed, continue working and complete the bridge within a year time span, or if the phased project is selected it could take two to two and a half years to complete the bridge. The Director said weighing the inconvenience and additional cost the recommendation would be to do a single phase project, and requested authorization to forward a letter to the Long Beach city Council endorsing this Report, seeking their support to move this project along with an anticipated start in the spring of next year and completion by fall. Mayor Yost expressed support for the proposed reduction of travel lanes to two and indicated it 4-12-99 I would be of benefit to complete the project in a year rather than so much longer, a phased project with a single lane and signalized would not be convenient for anyone, especially for a period of two or more years, also, for those who have concerns with regard to potential development in the Long Beach marina the two lane bridge with pedestrian and bicycle facilities will serve to deter that, it also protects and enhances the quality of life for Seal Beach. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to receive and file the Structure Type Selection Report for the San Gabriel River Bridge at Marina Drive, BR. NO. 53C-0029, and authorized the Mayor to sign a letter supporting the Report recommendations to the Long Beach City Council. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I PLANS/SPECIFICATIONS/ESTIMATES - CENTRAL AVENUE / 4th STREET ROUNDABOUT - PROJECT NUMBER 803 The Director of Public Works stated that the plans and specifications are the next step towards construction of a roundabout at the intersection of 4th and Central Avenue, the design is felt to be good, not elaborate, functional, a number of safety features including lighting, landscaping, a nice addition to the community. In keeping with the original intent of this project, once this project is completed there will be a monitoring program of traffic volumes and speed, and as stated previously a speed survey has been conducted on 5th Street. Mayor Yost urged that 5th Street be considered as soon as possible as they are part of the same problem. Councilman Boyd inquired if the Council has reviewed the plans and specifications as there was an initial concern with the size of the circle, inquiring if it has been reduced to the smallest possible. The Director confirmed that it has, one thing, the plans will show a rolled curb on the outer perimeter of the traffic circle, a mountable curb that can be driven over by emergency vehicles, moving vans, etc., the rolled curb is actually a few feet in from the perimeter, one concern was, if there is not a substantial movement, wheel turn, to get around the circle a vehicle will not slow down, the intent of this project is to slow traffic. He noted that before the actual bid process the intent is to physically paint a couple of circles, possibly even some cones, in that intersection that can be test driven. Councilman Boyd offered that the intent was that this project be effective, not a giant circle, actually a pilot project for other areas of the City, the circle reduced from thirty feet to what is now a twenty foot diameter raised planter with three feet of rolled curb, thus a twenty-six inch total diameter, his preference being to keep the structure as small as possible and reduce the percentage of right-of-way required. The Director reported that this has been designed in a way that there is no longer need to acquire right-of-way. It was mentioned however that for this to be effective it needs to have the effect of slowing traffic to negotiate the movement. Councilman Boyd mentioned that the cost associated with this structure has a direct relationship with the amount of concrete poured. The Director reported that the original street was concrete, drainage is accomplished by means of cross gutters at each leg of the intersection, to construct the roundabout will require some alteration of the drainage, upon further analysis of alternatives it appears to be just as cost effective to remove what exists and pour new concrete, asphalt could be used yet it is such a small amount I 4-12-99 it may not accomplish the intent. The Director pointed out that some colored concrete is proposed, as is the rolled curb, and the apron too is a different color, that is not meant to be decorative or elaborate, rather, it is to provide a contrast so that a driver can see the rolled curb and not drive over it, of prime concern is visual and some of the costs are driven by safety, what is desired is a quality project. Councilman Boyd inquired as to the difference between utilizing an existing concrete apron around the circle and pouring new concrete at the corners where it is necessary to decrease the public right-of-way, is substantial money being saved by not pouring the entire intersection with concrete, to that the Director offered that there is not that much of a cost saving, what was found was with a minimal amount of removal and replacement there is a higher quality project when finished, some of the concrete could be saved yet considerable drainage difficulties would be realized. The Director confirmed that the final completed plans will show a twenty foot diameter with a three foot rolled curb, however clarified that the lip of the gutter of the rolled curb is actually five feet out, the high point of the curb is three feet, and stated that the plan looks bigger than the actual structure. I Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the plans and specifications for Project Number 803, the construction of a Central Avenue / 4th Street intersection roundabout, and authorized staff to initiate the public bidding process. Councilman Snow asked if it has been determined that the $50,000 will be the maximum amount no matter what change of design. The Director responded in the affirmative, however it is hoped that lesser bids will be received and possibly City staff can be used to some degree. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - LANDSCAPE / ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT / MITIGATION - SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD/WESTMINSTER AVENUE The Director of Public Works explained that this is a joint project between the Recreation and Public Works Departments, a grant received several years ago from the State under the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program for the purpose of building medians and planting parkway trees on Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster, basically a seed money project as there is not enough money to construct medians all along those streets, however the intent was to do from Bolsa to Lopez Drive with assistance of the future Hellman development, some isolated plantings on Westminster, and the parkways on Westminster and Seal Beach Boulevard, there are a number of agencies involved, the Orange County Conservation Corp, the Navy, Hellman Ranch, and the City. He noted that part of the grant provides for some design money for a I concept plan for medians and plantings. A substantial number of trees will be planted as a result of this project, retaining the consultants will help with taking the first step of this project. The Manager noted that this was tied to the Bolsa Chica development, the argument being that the impacts created regionally by a project of that magnitude warranted some environmental enhancement, the grant amount was $235,000. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the professional services agreement with Integrated Urban Forestry to provide 4-12-99 I planning, conceptual design, and project management services in conjunction with the City's Seal Beach Boulevardl Westminster Avenue Landscape Project at a cost no~ to exceed $6,400, and authorized the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. Councilman Boyd asked if this project identifies medians and parkways or just medians, to which the Director responded that the grant calls for medians and parkway trees. Councilman Boyd said his preference would be that the greatest detail of work and expenditure of time be spent on medians rather than parkways, which is felt be of greatest benefit, explaining that a parkway is typically from the curb and gutter to the sidewalk, about thirty six inches, also, the Director noted that in areas where there is no sidewalk it would be from edge of roadway to the right-of-way marking. On Seal Beach Boulevard there are parkway gaps. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING I ORDINANCE NUMBER 1419 - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 96-1 - DECK STRUCTURES Mayor Yost stated that he would turn the conduct of this public hearing over to Mayor ProTem Campbell inasmuch as this matter affects his area directly and he wished to listen closely to the testimony. I Mayor ProTem Campbell declared the public hearing open to consider ZTA 96-1 relating to deck structures in rear yard setbacks. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised and mailed as required by law, and reported receipt of one communication from Mr. Reg Clewley, Catalina Avenue, which had been provided to the Council. I The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, this a reconsideration item, considerable information provided as attachments to the staff report that gives a feel for this in-going issue. He explained that in late 1997 an ordinance was introduced to make changes to the Code to allow non-permitted pre-existing decks on properties that abut the Gum Grove Park and Hellman property to remain, this subject to a minor plan review through the Planning Commission, part of that ordinance also allowed persons seeking to build a new deck in the rear ten foot area to make application through a Conditional Use Permit process, the second reading of the proposed ordinance failed, the Council requested staff to come back with suggestions. Between 1997 and 1998 this issue was returned to the Planning Commission for further consideration, the primary issues were Code enforcement or to amend the Code to not have to go through the enforcement process. This issue began with 1733 Crestview with a deck being constructed at the rear of that property, a stop work order had been issued, the owners of the property applied for a variance to approve the deck, upon Planning Commission denial of Variance 5-90 the matter was appealed to the City Council, the Council denied the Variance also, with that denial the Council directed staff to not proceed with a Code enforcement action, rather, develop some type of amendment to the Code that would allow that structure, and others within the area, to be legalized through some review process at the City level. Thereafter staff prepared Zone Text Amendment 96-1, scheduled hearings before the Planning Commission in 1996, the Amendment went through a number of reviews at both the Planning Commission and City Council level, the 4-12-99 Commission ultimately recommended denial of the Zone Text Amendment, that there be no change to the Code and that existing Code be enforced. An appeal of that decision was filed, the Council held a public hearing on the appeal, between the start of hearings in late 1996 through 1997, until early 1998 is when the ordinance was considered and ultimately rejected. At this point the City continues to be under instruction of the City Council to not enforce the existing ordinance provisions for non-permitted structures within the rear ten feet of properties that abut the Hellman land and Gum Grove Park. It was noted that the City considered an ordinance that would allow those non-permitted structures to come before the Planning Commission for a discretionary review to determine whether or not they should be allowed to remain, the Council ultimately rejected that, the matter is now back before this Council to determine what direction to go with this issue. He noted that from a staff viewpoint, a decision one way or the other would be greatly appreciated, it is difficult to explain to the public that staff is under instruction to not enforce a Code provision in one area of the City, also, this issue has taken considerable City Council, Planning Commission and staff time. The Director directed attention to the photographs contained in the staff report, reviewed by the Planning Commission as submitted by a member of the public, photos to be shown also that were taken by staff, this will provide greater understanding as to the types and magnitude of the structures in the area that are of concern. Councilmember Campbell inquired if some of the four to six structures have been inspected as to whether they meet Code, the response was that they have not. The Development Services Director showed photos submitted by area resident, Mr. Clewley, and then those taken by City staff of twenty-two properties on Crestview and Catalina Avenues and Coastline Drive having various structures such as storage sheds, block walls, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools, spas, patio roofs/overhangs, sunrooms, playhouses, tree houses, and decks, permits for some, no permits for others. As a point of information, it was explained that if a storage shed is less than 120 square feet in size no permit is required, if a playhouse is less than 50 square feet in size no permit is required, if a structure is less than 120 square feet in size no permit is required, and if the structure is more than 10 feet from the rear property line, no Code violation of the setback exists. Mayor Yost asked if there is a height limit for a deck structure, how is it measured, the response was that it is measured from the flat portion of the property closest thereto on the same lot. It was explained that where the decks exist is primarily where the rear yard slopes down into Gum Grove Park, in fact there are some properties where the property line is higher at the fence line and the property slopes down into the residential area yet most slope into Gum Grove Park, that is why the elevated deck structures are seen. It was clarified that there is a permit for one of the rear yard deck structures, also, there are a number of retaining walls along the back of those properties, permits were found for all but one. To a question of whether retaining walls are allowed to go to the property line, whether a retaining wall can be constructed up to the ground level where a deck could be built, the response was affirmative, most are between six and sixteen feet in height, some have fencing on top, to the rear is sometimes backfilled for a flat lawn or deck area, that however is not an issue under consideration. Some properties have been terraced, one has a stairway to the Gum Grove with a gate, the terracing is I I I 4-12-99 I allowed by Code. The Director explained that there is a six foot utility easement across the rear of all of the subject properties, building in the easement is not prohibited, if one wishes to do so it is typical to obtain written consent from the owner of the utility easement to do so, even though it is likely permission may not be given to build upon the entire easement as access is required. To an inquiry as to whether retaining walls into the easement are a problem, the response was that retaining walls are at the boundary of the property and once constructed and the property is leveled it is actually easier for the utility company to access, question was posed also as to by what means could a utility company underground the power lines, under retaining walls, in the easement, on Gum Grove land. While showing the photographs, the Director pointed out the improvements for which permits do and do not exist for each of the subject properties. As to the 1733 Crestview property, where this matter began, this deck has not been permitted, a stop work order was issued, there was a change of ownership of the property, the new owners were made aware of the non-permitted structure, and they in turn signed a document acknowledging their awareness of it, that the City was going through a related zone text amendment and whatever the outcome of that process they would need to comply. The Director mentioned that there are two avenues for consideration, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to not change the Code and commence an enforcement action for those properties that appear to be in violation of the current building regulations of the City, or another option would be likened to what was considered by the previous Council in 1997 and 1998, and similar to the Council action in 1992 and 1993 with the adoption of standards for covered roof access structures, at which time there were a number of such structures constructed, building permits issued, and the City required all of the previously permitted structures to come in for a minor plan review. That process is likened to the action being proposed in this case for Planning Commission review of the deck structures to assure they meet minimum health, safety, and public welfare standards, also, provision that future deck requests go through the conditional use permit process, the difference in process is that the CUP is a public hearing item, noticed to three hundred feet of the subject property, the minor plan review is a consent calendar item and noticed within one hundred feet. Mayor Yost inquired as to the age of the subject decks, to which the Director said that is unknown as permits were not issued, the one permitted deck was issued in 1989, some were likely built in the mid to late 1970's, possibly twenty-five to thirty years old. With regard to any problems with the CRAS process, the Director offered that they were somewhat easier to deal with, in that case the stairways were allowed as part of the building permit, prior to the minor plan review they were allowed by right under the Zoning Code, that issue began with a CRAS on the Hill that had an openable dome and was determined to not be in keeping with the intent of the Code, that triggered calling in all permitted CRAS for review and reapproval, the only CRAS required to make modifications was the one on the Hill, all others were reapproved. In response to the Mayor, the Director said from what can be observed there appears to be five to six properties having decks in this case out of eighty-two lots, and that assumes that the storage sheds are portable, under the one hundred twenty square feet, that can be moved if need be. The City Manager recalled that at a previous hearing one of the solutions was to allow the pre-existing decks to stand, with no enforcement I I 4-12-99 action, new applications would need to request a conditionaluse permit or a variance, the concern was that with approval of the pre-existing structures that would be rewarding unpermitted construction, and 'for those who may have waited for the outcome would be at a disadvantage. The effect of taking no action and let the Code stand as is would be to direct staff to inspect the subject decks and commence an enforcement action against the property owner, there would be no opportunity for appeal or hearings, which could also involve court proceedings in the event the property owner did not comply. He mentioned that if the Council were to choose the minor plan review process that would allow the opportunity to establish reasonable conditions of approval for these non-permitted decks, landscaping enhancements an example. I Mayor ProTem Campbell invited members of the audience wishing to speak to this item to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. The City Attorney made reference to a letter received from Stephen Reg Clewley dated April 10, 1999, its twenty-two pages to be entered into the record. Issues raised by means of the letter are desired to be addressed prior to receiving testimony, a request that attachment eight, a Minority Report from Commissioner Dahlman be suppressed and not entered into evidence, to that the City Attorney said he had not seen the attachment, and reported that Mr. Dahlman abstained from this matter when it was before the Planning Commission, therefore his testimony is treated as a resident and not as a Planning Commissioner, therefore for those having an attachment eight it should be treated as a letter from a resident, not as a Planning Commissioner. Mayor Yost made reference to the issue of a statement that 'no further hearings are required,' to which the City Attorney explained that at the time of that comment a number of public hearings had been held, there was a first reading, a second reading, and request for additional public hearing at that time, his ruling had been that no additional public hearing was necessary as there were prior public hearings on the matter, with respect to whether one is required at this time, he had not looked at that as the Council can always allow public testimony on any matter therefore there is no legal problem seen with allowing people to speak, there is no violation of any law by allowing people to speak. Question was posed if there is a time limit for each speaker or is that set by the Council, to that the City Attorney confirmed that a Council Resolution allows five minutes, that is the rule unless the Mayor wishes otherwise, there is no applicant in this matter therefore no concern with due process considerations, merely allow each person an equal amount of time. I Mr. Arthur Nighswonger, Catalina Avenue, stated he resides on the opposite side of the street from the properties under discussion. Mr. Nighswonger spoke for allowing the construction of decks in the rear setback, with permit, as appropriate, the properties are unique in that they do not back to a neighbor, the persons on these three streets will be backing to a golf course or other development. Again stating that he would support the amendment of the Code to allow construction of decks in the rear yard setback. Ms. Lisa Long, Crestview Avenue, mentioned that she saw the photographs shown of her home and decking, and brought with her the paperwork relating to the deck with the approvals thereon. She stated at some point they may want to replace the existing decking, the ten foot setback seems to be unfair I 4-12-99 I because in her case the fence is on the property line yet this says that one can not use the last ten feet of their property, some consideration should be given because of the way the ground slopes downward. Mayor ProTem Campbell said she believed that when the lots were originally designated, the lots on Catalina, because of the slope, were allowed a longer depth in consideration that there was less usable space. To a question of Mayor Yost, the Director confirmed that notice of the hearing had been sent to each property owner and occupant, however had not been noticed that photos may be shown on cablevision. Mr. Reg Clewley, Catalina, said he was not certain the Council had an opportunity to review the information he had presented. Mr. Clewley confirmed that Mr. Dahlman had been asked to abstain from this issue at the Planning Commission, he did, attachment eight of the documents is the cover page of a minority report from then Commissioner Dahlman. Mr. Clewley claimed that Mr. Dahlman had no right to prepare a minority report as he had abstained from the decision making process, that report should not have been included in the Council information nor considered, which he also claimed is a violation of the Fair Political Practices Commission guidelines. He said there have been problems in recent years with regard to documentation, his communications have not been thoroughly covered in the minutes, however have been provided in the packet of documents he presented which raises a few more issues. He offered that in September of 1997, when the motion for an ordinance was made, the contention was concern that this was something that had been built years ago and not known what Codes were required at that time. September, 1996 minutes reflect that the Director had explained that the setback was adopted in 1957, yet there were no houses built on the Hill prior to 1957, the Code has been in place longer than the homes on the Hill, there were no pre-existing decks, the motion made by Council was arbitrary for a structure to be grandfathered, grandfathering is for a structure that predates the applicable COde, when the Code has been standing longer than the houses, and there is documentation of that, then someone decides to build what they want, that can not be grandfathered, that is a granting of a special privilege and contrary to what can be done to implement a zone text amendment. There is a lot of misinformation, it has been said that maybe things were built before the Code, there were not, there has been some support for the text amendment, one speaker was the subject of an aborted action against his property some years ago, the Council decided that was a civil matter, the responsibility of someone other than the City to prosecute. Mr. Clewley said the appeal of the denial was without merit, the owners may have been greedy when they spoke in favor before and by appealing they were selfish beyond reason, Ordinance 1419 attempted to give special privilege, it is detrimental to the Code and the confidence of people in the building code to allow illegally constructed structures to remain, if allowed now they will be allowed later. Mr. Clewley stated there is going to be a real problem with what the City Manager predicted will happen, the City sends letters to people who offend this law, there are only three properties that potentially have any near term impact from the enforcement of the Code as it stands because, in most cases, no one told them they were offending until now, it has been the policy of the City to enforce nothing until the property is sold, two of the properties are for sale and if sold they would be noticed that they would need to come forward, by allowing this to occur property owner after property owner is wrong, the Code will never be I I 4-12-99 enforced, and this case can be used against the City by any person who wishes to avoid paying property taxes, increased property taxes, building permit fees, etc., these are things that can be avoided if one does not take out a building permit and the City does not enforce the Code. Mr. Clewley cited this as a complex issue, hoped that the documents he provided are thorough, and offered to respond to questions. He encouraged that the Code be supported and enforced, that things be built the way they are supposed to be, and preserve the fifty thousand square feet that is potentially being stolen from the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan forage area, all of the animals that are living in the wetland habitat, fifty thousand square feet is being stolen by allowing people to build up to that property line where that can not be done anywhere else in the City, this land should be considered no less valuable than anyone elses, especially with the problems the City and Hellman has had with determining how many acres have to go under water, and what is going to happen to all of the animals, green space is valuable, his property is affected by this, his house abuts the Hellman Ranch, stating that he wants the green space for the entire mile preserved as open space to enhance the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan. The Mayor mentioned that it has been said under current Code there can be a retaining wall to extend the backyard out to the property line, a concrete structure of the same height is allowed at the same height as the existing wooden structures, asking if concrete structures up to that height would be preferred. Mr. Clewley countered that there is a ten foot limit for rear yard fences, to that the Mayor said he was speaking of retaining walls and leveling the property to the property line which allows use of that property, thus a concrete rather than wooden structure is allowed, to him a wooden structure that allows air underneath, allows plants to climb and grow on it is more beneficial than a concrete structure of the same height with dirt behind it. Mr. Clewley predicted the existence of a fire hazard, yet the higher decks mentioned may not be particularly dangerous. The Mayor asked if Mr. Clewley was advocating that the City go out and sue its residents, issue demolition orders, and pull all of the people along the area into court for things that have existed for thirty years. Mr. Clewley replied in the negative, stating that the only property that is under an enforcement order at this time is the property at 1733 Crestview, other properties have not been advised that they are in violation of the Code, if they are advised then they have the opportunity to ask the City Councilor Planning Commission for a variance, they have the ability to appeal a denial to the Council, upon denial of the Council, if there is not compliance then there would be Code enforcement action against the subsequent owners once the property is sold. He said the City is not about to start demolishing structures on the subject streets, they pursue Code enforcement only upon complaint, only after all avenues of appeal have been exhausted, and the property is sold, that has been done with 1733 and allowed to go down another generation of property owners. To the mention of abandoned vehicles, Mr. Clewley said he did not know of any law in the City that says one can not park a car in the driveway, in his case he has a car in the garage, in the driveway, and in the street, in his neighborhood there are a number of old care enthusiasts. Mr. Clewley again spoke for Code enforcement, there is a procedure, it is best if it is followed. Mayor ProTem Campbell noted that there are instances where a rear yard slopes downward, yet there are some that go straight out to the end of the property, in those instances is the property I I I 4-12-99 I allowed a concrete deck within the ten foot setback. The Director confirmed that an on-grade patio slab is allowed, yet the question of the Mayor was to a property that has a slope and the owner wishes to construct a retaining wall, then behind the wall level the slope so that it matches the grade of the property, can the owner then put in an on-grade patio slab, the answer is yes they can, and in that situation rather than seeing an underside of a deck you see a retaining wall. I Ms. Teri Meyers, 1733 Crestview Avenue, stated she bought her home in 1995, the deck was apparently built in 1990, it is sturdy and done well even though not permitted. Ms. Meyers said she wished to speak in favor of the zone text amendment, and reserve the right to speak later should there be need after the decision as to a separate issue but pertaining to what has gone over the years, and with regard to giving more weight to testimony by being sworn, said she would do that if it is necessary to speak a second time. Mayor ProTem Campbell advised that Ms. Meyers would have the opportunity to speak at public comments yet a vote may have been taken by then. Ms. Meyers said she wished to limit her first comments to this particular issue, she has obtained a copy of the agenda and staff report, and commended the cooperation and assistance of the City over this period. She noted the listing of her residence in the staff report, the description points out that 'permits are on file for a six-foot high block retaining wall, a sundeck, swimming pool, and addition to a pool house, that the larger deck is known to not be permitted since this is the property subject to the initial code enforcement action and variance was denied that started the discussion of changing the rear yard setback for this area of the City.' Ms. Meyers then read the ending sentence, 'subsequently, a cabana has been constructed on the non- permitted deck without the benefit of permits,' to that Ms. Meyers said she would like to know where that came from because she does not have a cabana, the only thing she has done since purchasing the property is an addition that is fully permitted, she has done nothing to the deck and did not know where the statement relating to a cabana came from. Ms. Meyers did offer that when previous statements were made that the deck was ugly, she had said she would be willing to plant anything that would be desired, she stated that their deck does not go all the way to the property line, there remains several feet, there is a retaining wall that is legal and believed does go to the property line, that was acceptable, apparently the deck is not, that is what is hoped to be changed. Ms. Meyers emphasized her support for the zone text amendment, acknowledging that she does have a vested interest, she claimed her deck is beautiful, it is felt to be an enhancement, as she has said in the past, provided pictures of the deck which also dispels the statement that there is a cabana, rather, there is a table, chairs, and a couple of umbrellas, she pointed out the level of the lawn and deck as the same, the deck covering the slope which most likely avoided erosion from the heavy rains in recent past. Ms. Meyers said she invited the Planning Commission and Council to visit her home and look at the deck, no one except Councilmember Campbell did so, and she walked the area behind the property, that was appreciated as has been said all along they are sorry the deck was not permitted, it was not done by them, they would like to keep the deck, it is felt to be an enhancement, if it is required to be cut back that will result in several feet and pose difficulty to maintain the area, that could pose a fire problem, since she has lived I 4-12-99 there.the foliage has grown up around the deck, also when the deck was Quilt, in order to not destroy the trees, the deck was built around them, it is beautiful, there is wildlife as well. Ms. Meyers said she believes that the property itself is an enhancement, likewise she can not go back and change the fact that it was not permitted, for that she is sorry, she could not have not bought the property because the deck had not been permitted, when a zone change was proposed she spoke for it, she had been polite, helpful, believed they were doing what they were supposed to do, they filed an appeal within the appropriate time frame, the Planning Commission denied it, they have followed the rules, this is not their fault, they have tried to do whatever was necessary, this started in 1995/1996 and is still not resolved, again, the deck is now surrounded by foliage, beautiful, and frequented by wildlife. Ms. Meyers stated again that they just want to keep the deck, the deck is merely a continuation of the floor and a fence, the property is very safe. Mayor ProTem Campbell asked if the deck goes into the setback. The Director responded that the deck structure is closer than ten feet to the rear property line, within the setback but not totally to the property line. Mayor ProTem Campbell noted a stairway, asking if it is from the addition, to which Ms. Meyers responded that there had been a stairway, they merely brought it out some twenty feet which then goes onto the beginning of the deck, all done with permits from the City. There being no further comments, Mayor ProTem Campbell declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Yost cited this as a difficult issue, seeing both sides, there are people who clamor for Code enforcement, people who say it is not a good idea to let people build things and not hold them accountable, otherwise, why have a building department, why have a code enforcement process if it is not going to be enforced, the reason for building codes and code enforcement is to assure that buildings and structures are safe within a given area, that the reason for having things inspected and certified by the engineers and inspectors. The problem as seen is that there are a number of places where people stand and humans spend time yet no one from the City has certified that these structures are in deed safe, there has been adequate notice that there are a number of such structures out there, should one of them fall and injure someone the City would likely be liable, also, the City would not be performing its obligation to not inspect them and assure that they are safe structures. He noted that they are called structures yet if a retaining wall is placed on the rear property line as can be done by Code and extend the backyard with a mass of dirt and concrete, that is okay, yet if one builds a wooden structure, a deck, with vines growing on it that is not okay yet it creates the same exact living area for the residents, that because the deck is a structure that lies within the back ten feet of the property, which to him is an inconsistency. What is the responsibility of the City, it is to provide homes and structures that are safe for the residents, the City should not be climbing into the yards of people looking for violations, people do have a certain amount of privacy in their domain, nor should the City be taking them to court for things that have existed for over thirty years. If asked if he thinks it is a good idea to reward people who have built things illegally, Mayor Yost said he certainly does not, is it a good idea to reward those who did not comply or ignore a stop work order, the Mayor also said it is not, but his feeling is that what staff has proposed regarding this particular issue is good, yet he I I I 4-12-99 I would like to take it one step further in terms of future regulations, put some type of limit on the height so that they can be terraced to some degree, there is going to be a golf course, homes, a nature preserve out there, he would like some provision to assure an aesthetic situation, even though most people take care of their homes, if certain codes are not enacted there is really no protection to assure that that takes place. Mayor Yost pointed out that the prospects set up by the proposed Ordinance requires a conditional use permit process and review and can require arborization, plants, and"various means of screening. He said again, this a difficult issue, much time has been spent, this needs to come to an end, and he would support the recommendation of staff with some language to provide for terracing, by doing that there would be some assurance that the structures are safe and they are permitted. Mayor ProTem Campbell said if staff inspects all of these properties and if something is found to not be to Code, will it come down, the response of the Mayor was yes, to assure that it is safe. Councilman Boyd asked what code, what is in question is not the good faith effort of a property owner to maintain a nice property, what is in question is the Code, and as it reads the decks on these properties are not allowed, that has to be defined before they are inspected and determined to be safe. The Mayor offered that what would be looked at is the basic code surrounding a structure in terms of size, ability to bear weight, etc. to assure safety, that is done by the building inspectors. Councilman Boyd stated that is the Uniform Building Code, not the City Code, and subject to approval of ZTA 96-1. Councilman Snow said in consideration of the magnitude of the motion that may be considered, and the effect it will have on the residents of Seal Beach Leisure World as well, suggested that this item be postponed for at least two weeks for further research, from his standpoint he has not had time to look into the various impacts of the recommendations. The Mayor noted that when an ordinance is considered it has a second reading, that would be in two weeks, this issue has gone on since 1990. Mayor ProTem Campbell stated that she had walked Crestview from one end to the other and was able to observe all of the decks, when the Meyers put in their pool they used the dirt to further level the property, there is no doubt that they have a lovely deck, it was the previous owner that failed to obtain a permit yet they knew that when they purchased the property, also, while walking she observed other decks that were questionable to her from a safety factor, even though they may be sound, to Councilman Snow she offered that she had looked at this area before, looked at it once again today, she has not gotten through the entire agenda packet on this issue, she would have no problem delaying the matter for two more weeks, suggested too that her fellow Councilmembers also walk the area. Mayor Yost stated that he too has walked the area, and again reminded that this issue has gone on for nearly a decade, noted that it was the past Council that recommended this not be an enforcement issue, it is the job of the Council to set policy, that is what would be done with the zone text amendment, there is also a precedent to what has been done, are areas of the City treated differently based upon where they are, this is similar to what was done along the Gold Coast with the overhangs, that essentially the same process that the Council is endeavoring here. Again noting that under the Code one can build a concrete structure to the same level as some of the wooden decks, that is okay, but the wooden deck, because it is in the setback is classified as a different type of entity and therefore it is illegal, that I I 4-12-99 creates the problem. As to the height of the concrete structure, it was stated that it can be a height equal to the flat grade of the property, no matter the height. Discussion continued with regard to postponing this matter for a period of two weeks. Question was raised as to further testimony, some of which has been heard a number of times, to which the City Attorney advised that the hearing has been closed, however testimony would be at the discretion of the Council. The City Manager noted that the Director of Development Services would not be present at the next meeting therefore requested that this item be continued for a month. I Yost moved, second by Doane, to close debate on this item. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost None Snow Motion carried Mayor Yost moved to approve Zone Text Amendment 96-1 by the introduction of Ordinance Number 1419, and that staff bring back language with regards to terracing of property for future applications for decks. The City Attorney advised that if the motion is approved, assuming that it is to introduce Ordinance 1419, in connection with the second reading the staff can provide a report with the type of conditions that the Council may consider as establishing as a policy, similar to the Council action with regard to restaurants that serve alcohol, a policy that is now standard conditions, or there could be amendment of some of the uncodified portions of the Ordinance, provisions that will be in the Ordinance however not set forth in the Code. The Manager stated this would be a listing of the conditions that could be set as part of the minor plan review in the future, terracing, landscaping, or other means to mitigate the visual impact of decks. Councilman Doane made reference to the listing within the staff report of the various properties where things have ~een built or exist that have no permits, inquiring what is to be done with those. The Director explained that the Ordinance would require those properties to come back to the City for a minor plan review through the Planning Commission within a twelve month period. Mayor Yost noted that the properties would be inspected to determine if they are safe and habitable. Councilman Doane inquired if the properties meet that criteria would they then receive a permit, and if the Commission denies would they still have the ability to appeal to the Council. The response was yes. Mayor Yost moved again to introduce Ordinance Number 1419 as stated by the City Attorney to include additional language with regard to terracing, and screening by way of vegetation. The title of Ordinance Number 1419 was read by the City Attorney, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AMENDING SECTION 28-401 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH TO CONDITIONALLY ALLOW DECK STRUCTURES IN REAR YARD SETBACKS OF PROPERTIES IN THE RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY ZONE, DISTRICT V, WHICH ABUT THE HELLMAN RANCH OR GUM GROVE PARK." Councilman Doane seconded the motion. I I AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Doane, Yost Campbell, Boyd Snow Motion failed Mayor Yost moved to continue the matter of Ordinance Number 1419, Zone Text Amendment 96-1, until the next meeting. Councilman Doane seconded the motion. To an inquiry if the 4-12-99 Planning Assistant could attend the next meeting, it was suggested that he not inasmuch as he has been in employment for less than a week. It was also suggested that the Director meet with Councilman Snow prior to that meeting. Vote on motion to continue: I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried The City Attorney clarified that the public hearing has been closed, there is no further meeting notice required. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS There was no report from the City Attorney. I CITY MANAGER REPORTS The City Manager announced the new Assistant Planner for the Development Services Department, Mr. Mac Cummins. He reported the first delivery of the Honda electric fueled vehicles have arrived, paid for through a grant secured last year, presently parked in front of City Hall for viewing. The Manager announced that the Police Department is scheduling a desk top emergency preparedness exercise, possibly sometime in May, as background some of the staff have attended disaster preparedness sessions and what has come from that is that there is an industrial facility across the street from the emergency operations center, the concern was what type of chemicals they use and whether they would jeopardize the EOC when it is needed most, after an earthquake as an example, to that Captain Maiten investigated and found there were no chemicals that would cause problems. Councilmember Campbell asked who will be participating in the exercise. The Manager said it would be the department heads, the Weapons Station, Leisure World, Orange County Fire, and Councilmembers if they wish to be involved. The Manager announced that the City receives requests for cellular phone antennas quite regularly, some are free standing like the one on the Bixby site, some on City property near the freeway, some are mounted on the Administration Building clock tower, they do generate income to the City, yet he wanted to advise the Council that as requests continue he has been dissuading the cell phone companies because the proliferation starts to create a visual blight, however they continue to come in with new designs, one proposed for Arbor Park was a fake pine tree, it is felt this City is nearing saturation. Unless the Council feels otherwise, staff will continue to discourage further antenna sites. I PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Yost declared Public Comments to be open. Mr. Gordon Shanks, Surf Place, made reference to agenda item "0", a request for revenue augmentation from Los Angeles County for beach cleanup, to which he suggested a special emphasis of the request be that this is the first surfing beach from the other side of San Pedro, thus it is not that Seal Beach is not providing a service to the County to the north, the Supervisors may not know much about Long Beach or Seal Beach, and the better they are educated the better chance of getting some money. Councilman Boyd said he does anticipate attending that meeting to speak to the Board in reference to the request, and in the packet being forwarded to them it is expected there will be sufficient information for them to understand the geographic location, that Seal Beach serves two million visitors a year, and a large percentage of those 4-12-99 visitors come from Los Angeles County. Mr. Ken Kroft, Crestview Avenue at the entrance to Gum Grove, referred to comments with regard to placing trees in the parkways along Seal Beach Boulevard, to which he said he thought there was going to be sidewalks for pedestrian access associated with the Hellman development. The Manager responded that sidewalks were envisioned however the desire is to look at all of the alternatives, then bring them all to the Council, there may be some options without planting trees and have another form of footpath, a desire was to connect the new neighborhood with Bolsa Avenue and the school. Mr. Kroft said at the time that plantings are being considered thought should be given to sidewalks or pedestrian walkways, one should not come before the other. Mr. Kroft mentioned too that he has had conversations with members of the Council with regard to the access of dogs into the Gum Grove Park area, there is a sign that states no dogs, yet there is a proliferation of dog walkers and users in the Park, that is no problem to him, the issue is that there is an ordinance that states dogs are prohibited, there is an ineffective use of resources to police the situation and it is not being resolved. He said with the Hellman development coming that is going to be a concern and he would like to see that situation resolved. Mr. Kroft proposed a solution, that seems to have some satisfaction amongst the dog walkers, police, animal control, etc., suggesting that in the licensing process there be an additional license or fee that might be available to residents who want to walk their dogs in the Park with possibly a special tag, in that event instead of the no dog sign there could be signage citing the special license provisions and regulations by the special permit. Of concern is that the majority of people that use the Park are those who have dogs, which is fine as long as they clean up, yet people likely come from other cities as well to avail themselves of this Park, possibly they too could use the Park with the special permit and additional fee, and any monies that might come from this process could be turned over to the Gum Grove group for augmentation of the Park, cleanup or whatever. Mr. Kroft requested consideration and that this process move forward. Mayor Yost declared Public Comments closed. I I COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Doane said he wished to recognize another member of the Council for doing something that he should have. He quoted from an article in the Long Beach Press Telegram entitled 'Project Effort to Keep Seawater Out Tied to Collapse of Structure', relating to the seemingly harmless Orange County Water District project of injecting wells along the Alamitos Bay with fresh water which is designed to keep subsurface migration sea water away from fresh water wells by injecting the wells with fresh water...which led to a liquefaction problem and the destruction of a twelve unit complex in Leisure World.' He noted that Councilman Snow pointed out this problem because if that water were added that would severely impact the liquefaction problem. Councilman Boyd mentioned having provided a memo to the City Manager recently about the City's web site relative to updates to assure that all of the information is correct and that pictures of Councilmembers be taken and placed on the web, a question also if a member of the Council could access the web to update their pages on upcoming Public Works projects, district activities, etc. Mayor Yost said he had done his own, provided the address to staff which allows him to update about once a month, the Councilmember has control I 4-12-99 I over the update, etc. The Manager stated he had spoken to staff, possibly before the next meeting the Council could avail themselves of pictures. Councilman Boyd said he was merely looking to enhance the Council web pages. Councilmember Campbell thanked Boy Scout Troop 642 for their presence at this meeting, to the Eagle project on Saturday, landscaping six of the entrances to College Park East, she thanked the Public Works employees for their assistance and the nursery for donating some of the plant materials and providing others at a substantially reduced rate for the Scouts, thanking all who contributed to the Eagle project. She noted the Bunny Bash held at Heather Park about two weeks ago, thanked the three Girl Scout Troops who assisted, the Park and Recreation Commissioner, the College Park East Neighborhood Association, and the very special bunny. Councilmember Campbell announced a meeting of the CPE Neighborhood Association on April 22nd at 7:30 p.m. at the North Seal Beach Community Center. She offered condolences to the family and friends of Frank Clift, a former four year member of the City Council, who passed away on March 29th. Councilmember Campbell announced attending a seminar sponsored by Congressman Rohrabacher on terrorism, copies of some of that information provided to the Council particularly with Seal Beach in the midst of the Naval Weapons Station. She mentioned the recent trip to Washington, D. C., the purpose of which was to lobby for airport reuse of EI Toro, a very worthwhile trip, twelve meetings in two days, of particular interest was the flight demonstrations, it will be seen that the flights are not that noisy and with that information the opposition to the airport will decrease, support was also sought for interim cargo operations, it is desired that those begin as soon as the Marines leave the base on July 1st, the County will be responsible for maintenance of the Station once the Marines are gone and the interim cargo operation will offset the maintenance costs. She noted there were many interesting and valuable insights as to what is going on. Councilmember Campbell reported also that a request for funding was put forth for the control tower at the Armed Forces Reserve Center, the request in support of that funding was requested at the beginning of this meeting. A request was made as well for relocating the commissary to the Naval Weapons Station. She offered that the trip was very worthwhile, Seal Beach has a vested interest in seeing that that airport is opened, if the projection that South Orange County will double its size in ten years those people will be utilizing the 405 Freeway to get to LAX, this area is basically maxed out and South County needs to do their share as to infrastructure. Councilmember Campbell presented Chief Sellers with police badges from the White Plains Police Department. Councilman Boyd announced the upcoming Car Show on April 24th on Main Street, and Mayor Yost noted that he would be at the Show at approximately 6:00 a.m. assisting with the parking of cars and invited all to attend. Councilmember Campbell announced the Seal Beach 10K Run this next Saturday, with Mayor Yost mentioning the lK and 5K as well. I I CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session to discuss the items identified on the agenda, a conference with legal counsel relating to three potential cases of anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b), a conference with legal counsel relating to existing litigation, Los Alamitos versus City of Seal Beach pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), 4-12-99 / 4-26-99 personnel matters as to the City Manager, City Attorney, and Public Works Supervisor pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 11:10 p.m. and reconvened at 1:00 a.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported the Council had given direction to the City Manager and City Attorney, no other action was taken. Yost moved, second by Snow, to approve the provision for supplemental health insurance for a thirty-five year City employee. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 1:01 a.m. () clerk Approved: rt: Attest: I Seal Beach, California April 26, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Absent: None Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Badum, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Ms. Stoddard, Director of Administrative Services Chief Sellers, Police Department Mr. Dorsey, Assistant to the City Manager Ms. Beard, Director of Recreation and Parks Ms. Yeo, City Clerk I