Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1998-06-22 6-16-98 / 6-22-98 * Question was raised as to the reduction of Beach Maintenance Rental/Lease Equipment fund, $74,997 last year, zero this year; staff was requested to provide explanation; * Redevelopment Agency, Debt Service - confirmed that the debt service is for bonds; those monies generated from Redevelopment Agency property taxes; with reference to Interest Expense, question was raised if retiring some of the debt has been considered, or refinancing; response was that refinancing has been looked at, was not possible this year, possibly in the future; question raised also as to the time frame for payoff of the lease and interest for the Zoeter parcels; guesstimate was that the agreements were twenty-five to thirty years; suggested that refinancing be looked into for this as well. I * With regard to the Capital Program, fuel pumps, a $235,000 one time cost, it was noted that an individual at the Naval Weapons Station indicated that it would not be out of the question to have an arrangement for fuel services in emergency situations. I ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Campbell suggested a possible presentation by Ms. Ducey, Newport Beach, on June 30th. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting until Monday, June 22nd at 6:30 p.m. to meet in Closed Session if deemed necessary. By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 6:12 p.m. Approved: ~ ~'h('JJ? L~ City Clerk Attest: Seal Beach, California June 22, 1998 I The regular adjourned meeting scheduled for 6:30 p.m. this date was canceled due to the lack of Closed Session items req . ing consideration. C' o 6-22-98 Seal Beach, California June 22, 1998 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:05 p.m. with Mayor Brown calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. I ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Brown Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane Absent: Councilmember Yost Brown moved, second by Doane, to excuse the absence of Councilman Yost from this meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Steele, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mr. Dorsey, Assistant to the City Manager Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Brown requested that Items "G" and "M" be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration, and that Items "Q" and "R" be considered prior to items "0" and "P", and councilmember Campbell requested that Item "F" be removed for separate consideration as well. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the order of the agenda as revised. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried PRESENTATION LONG BEACH JUNIOR CREW Ms. Seretta Fielding said she was present as a board member of the Long Beach Junior Crew, this non-profit organization- established in 1986 to support the dedication to rowing of students from the 8th to 12th grades. This Crew has eighty members, thirty-five of which are from Los Alamitos High School, they row each afternoon for two semesters, three hours per day at Marine Stadium. Ms. Fielding announced that this year Long Beach Junior Crew won the Cal Cup, the High School rowing team having the highest points scored in California, and introduced Brian George, the Captain, who displayed the Cup awarded for this achievement. Ms. Fielding then announced that four of the Crew girls placed first in the Sacramento Invitational for the California State Championship Womens Quad, Courtney Stanley, Julie Inch, Sarah Ward, and Megan Kemeny, the Girls Crew then went on to win the 1998 National Junior Rowing Championship in the Womens Quad, Julie Inch, Debbie Wund, Sarah Ward, and Megan Kemeny. Mayor Brown and Councilman Boyd presented Certificates of Recognition to the Long Beach Junior Crew members present for their accomplishments. Mayor Brown added his personal congratulations, recalling his experience as having been a I 6-22-98 member of a Crew team. Ms. Fielding noted that the members are from high schools throughout the area. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications presented. I APPOINTMENTS - BOARDS and COMMISSIONS planninq Commission Councilman Boyd reappointed Dr. Brian Brown as the District One representative to the Planning Commission for the four year term expiring July, 2002. Councilman Doane appointed Mr. Tom Lyon as the District Five representative to the Planning Commission for the unexpired term ending July, 1999. Environmental Quality Control Board Councilman Doane reappointed Mr. William Hurley as the District Five representative to the Environmental Quality Control Board for the four year term expiring July, 2002. Recreation and Parks Commission Councilmember Campbell reappointed Ms. Schelly Sustarsic as the District Four representative to the Recreation and Parks Commission for the three year term expiring July, 2001. I Councilman Doane appointed Ms. Frances Jiezak as the District Five representative to the Recreation and Parks Commission for the unexpired term ending July, 2000. Cable Communications Foundation Councilman Doane appointed Mr. Richard Davies as the District Five representative to the Seal Beach Cable Communications Foundation for the two year term expiring July, 2000. proiect Area Committee Councilman Boyd acknowledged the reappointment of Ms. Laura Alioto as requested by the Seal Beach Historical Society, and the reappointment of Mr. Gordon Shanks as requested by the San Gabriel Parks Society, both for the two year term expiring July, 2000. Boyd moved, second by Brown, to confirm the appointments as stated. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried I CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "B" thru "N" Brown moved, second by Campbell, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except Items "F, G, and M", removed for separate consideration. B. 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 unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. C. Approved regular demands numbered 19903 through 20052 in the amount of $1,035,433.80, 6-22-98 payroll demands numbered 27249 through 27713 in the amount of $235,007.44, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. D. Received and filed the staff report relating to the State of the Region - Measuring Progress into the 21st Century, prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. I E. Approved renewal of the Parking Agreement between the Grace Community Church and the City of Seal Beach for the term of one year commencing July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999, and authorized staff to execute same on behalf of the City. H. Received and filed the report from staff relating to the Notice of Availability - Record of Decision - Disposal and Reuse of the Long Beach Naval Station, and instructed staff to forward same to the Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. I. Adopted Resolution Number 4642 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ESTABLISHING WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR MANAGEMENT AND MID-MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATES SPECIFIED, ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4642 was waived. I J. Adopted Resolution Number 4643 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ESTABLISHING HOURLY WAGES FOR PART-TIME EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATES SPECIFIED, ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4643 was waived. K. Received and filed the Monthly Investment Report for May, 1998. L. Received and filed the staff report relating to the receipt of Draft Revision 1- Engineering Evaluation/cost Analysis for Operable Unit 1, Site 1 - Wastewater Settling Pond, Weapons Support Facility, Seal Beach, and instructed staff to forward same to the Environmental Quality Control Board and the Archaeological Advisory Committee for information purposes. I N. Approved the five year lease/purchase agreement with General Telephone Company for the acquisition of the Norstar Telecommunications System with Voicemail 6-22-98 and authorized execution of said agreement. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried I ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "F" - STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE 22 I I-405 FREEWAY PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Councilmember Campbell announced and encouraged attendance at an Orange County Transit Authority open house on June 23rd at the Garden Grove Community Center from 3:30 to 7:00 p.m., noting that projects being proposed will impact Seal Beach in the form of the addition of high-occupancy vehicle lanes, of concern is Almond Avenue that is presently adjacent to the freeway wall, a plan also to widen the 405 Freeway overpass. Campbell moved, second by Doane, to receive and file the staff report relating to the Notice of Initiation of Studies- State Route 22 and I-405 Freeway Improvements, authorized the Mayor to sign the response letter thereto, and instructed staff to forward the report to the Environmental Quality Control Board and Planning Commission for information purposes. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried I ITEM "M" - COUNCIL MINUTES Brown moved, second by Campbell, to approve the minutes of the January 12th, 1998 and the January 26th, 1998 regular adjourned and regular meetings. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Brown, Campbell None Boyd, Doane Yost Motion carried I ITEM "G" - RESOLUTION NUMBER 4641 - SUSTAINING APPEAL - HEIGHT VARIATION 98-2 - CUPOLA - 519 OCEAN AVENUE - HARBOUR Councilman Boyd announced that he would be abstaining from considering this item. Mr. Reg Clewley, Catalina Avenue, stated he opposed a vote on Resolution Number 4641, requested this item be continued to July 13th or thereafter, alleging irregularities at the prior meeting with regard to not permitting a Council member to act with the Council as a quasi-judicial body on this matter inasmuch as the person had participated in the action of the Planning Commission, which he claimed others have done, and made specific reference to prior actions relating to ZTA 96-1 and the recent action to precedentially exceed the height limit of structures by approval of Variation 98-2. He asked that this item be held over until the District Three member of the Council returns from vacation, and said the District Four member of the Council should abstain on this item. Mr. Roger West, Electric Avenue, requested that the proposed Resolution not be approved and that this matter be referred back to the Planning Commission, claiming that for the Council to attempt to resolve a denial by the Commission is demeaning to the Council position, is more work and a distraction. Mr. Ron Bennett, Catalina Avenue, stated he suppqrts the appeal, and noted that the Commission denied the request for the reason that they felt the design was not consistent with architecture in the area, yet having lived on that block he 6-22-98 described the various surrounding dwellings as a two story 40's ranch style contemporary, a southwestern simulated adobe style, an early 30's duplex, a tudor with nearly every kind of architectural adornment, another a likening of an early 30's beach cottage style duplex, etc. He noted that the applicant and his wife are native to Seal Beach, they are not developers, to call the proposed feature anything other than a covered roof access was likely a mistake, the existing dwelling is under the twenty-five foot height limit, an exception to the limit has been allowed in at least forty or fifty instances, the feature is open sided, basically a covered roof access without walls, it is a good design for Cape Cod or California cottage style structures, it fits the architecture. I Councilmember Campbell reported receiving calls and communications from people expressing their opinions relating to this matter, has also had discussions with her Planning Commission representative, and noted from her own experience that the Commission looks at a proposal in terms of the possibilities of future use in that variances run with the land, and no matter what is said this architectural feature is precedent setting. She offered that of particular concern is the term habitable, as an example, does a glass walled cupola make it habitable, what defines habitable, and what is the size of a cupola. She said what is not wanted is something that is or could become habitable, the size of a cupola has never been defined, therefore it is felt that this matter should be referred back to the Commission for a determination of size limits for architectural features, even though she likes the cupola feature, this needs to be defined now before there are other such requests, then asked if it is fair to define an architectural feature when the applicant is being heard, the answer is yes, the Code is not being changed, merely defined, possibly there is need to consider creating an architectural review board especially given the amount of remodeling. Councilmember Campbell moved that this matter be referred back to the Planning Commission for definition of size, etc. with regard to cupolas. I Mayor Brown made the comment that the Council needs to look closely at matters that are appealed from the Planning Commission before overturning their decision. Councilman Doane noted that in these instances the Council is acting in the capacity of an appeal review board and it is felt that the applicant is owed a decision rather than referring back to the Commission, thereafter returned to the Council, all of which could take considerable time. Councilmember Campbell inquired as to an approximate period of time, her intent was to let the Commission develop some guidelines so that the applicant could be granted his cupola. The Assistant City Attorney advised that the Code requires that a decision be announced on an appeal within forty days, in this case the Council could deny the appeal without prejudice so that the applicant can refile an application subsequent to the Commission developing guidelines. It was also pointed out also there are now two members of the Commission that were not seated when this matter was first heard. As to a time frame, staff explained that an amendment of the Zoning Code requires noticed public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, two readings of the ordinance, a thirty day period to take effect, that in addition to staff research and preparation of proposed guidelines, possibly four to six months. The City Manager said even though it may be possible for the Planning Commission to develop standards I 6-22-98 I for most situations, at this point it is difficult to see how some level of discretion can be avoided on a case by case basis, considering if the proposal will be detrimental to other properties or the neighborhood, it is believed that is how the Code provisions were designed, it is not certain that criteria for every property can be attained. Council again mentioned that there are guidelines for covered roof access structures, the intent is that no such feature be habitable and that no such considerations be precedent setting, also noted that the concern of the Commission was not with size, rather, it was felt the feature was not in keeping with the neighborhood. The Director of Development Services explained that the Building Code defines what is a habitable structure, if this structure were to be glass enclosed it would qualify as habitable space, that the reason for the conditions proposed, and should there be violation of the conditions there is a procedure to assure compliance. He noted that the City has dealt with CRA's for a number of years, this his first experience with a deck structure other than a CRA, from the comments it appears that the intent is to request the Commission to define criteria for several different types of architectural features that could be above the twenty-five foot height limit, possibly having nothing to do with a roof deck, the difficulty will be with setting standards for features that are unknown. I Mr. West commented again, stating that the precedent here is not the architectural feature, rather, it is the lack of support for the Planning Department and Commission. Mr. Alan Harbour, appellant, offered that cupolas do exist in the City, he has photos of them, as examples, Bank of America, corner of Main and Ocean, Edison triangle, those approved even though they may not have fallen into the height restriction. I After brief discussion, the motion of Councilmember Campbell was revised to reflect denial of the appeal without prejudice, that this issue be referred to the Planning Commission to more clearly define the criteria for various architectural features, specifically size definitions, and be completed in a timely manner. Councilman Doane seconded the motion. The Assistant City Attorney inquired if the preference of the Council was to establish standards different from those of this application, t~e dimensions, the conditions reflect a limit of four feet above the height limit, a non-habitable structure that can not be enclosed, and are the conditions felt to be adequate to not be precedent setting. As to the size of a covered roof access structure, the Director explained that the size varies depending upon the configuration of the stairway, generally somewhere between forty and sixty-five square feet, explained also that should the Council and Commission agree to establish specific standards in the Code, then a new application would need to be filed by the appellant pursuant to the new standards and go through the hearing process once again. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING / RESOLUTION NUMBER 4645 - STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Mayor Brown declared the public hearing open to consider the Street Lighting Assessment District for 1998/99. The City 6-22-98 Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, and reported no communications received either for or against this item. There being no comments from the audience, Mayor Brown declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Boyd noted that in more positive budget days, and it would be his desire, to do away with the street lighting assessment. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to adopt Resolution Number 4645 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4645 was waived. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - ASSOCIATION OF VOLLEYBALL PROFESSIONALS TOURNAMENT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-2 Mayor Brown declared the public hearing open to consider Negative Declaration 98-2 relating to the Association of Volleyball Professionals Tournament requested to be held July 10th through 12th, 1998. The City Clerk certified that the notice of public hearing had been advertised as required by law. The Director of Development Services presented a brief staff report, and noted receipt of one communication advising that there were no concerns with the Tournament request. Campbell moved, second by Boyd, to certify Negative Declaration 98-2, and instructed staff to file the appropriate documentation with the County of Orange. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried A brief recess was called at 8:00 p.m. and the Council reconvened at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Brown calling the meeting to order. PUBLIC HEARING / RESOLUTION NUMBER 4644 - 1998/99 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET Mayor Brown declared the public hearing open to consider the proposed 1998/99 fiscal year budget. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, and reported no communications received either for or against this item. The City Manager presented a brief overview of the impacts of State budget actions on cities in recent years, and noted the potential threat of the loss of vehicle license fees this year or soon thereafter. He offered that Seal Beach has been operating as best it can in this type of environment, now three years into a five year plan, there has been a start towards meeting City mandates for local reserves, with the ten percent reduction of electrical energy rates Seal Beach residents and businesses will be paying approximately four percent less in the utility users tax this year, and with rising property values and a strong economy General Fund revenue is anticipated to increase about 1.3 percent. He pointed out that contrary to some beliefs, the cost of City government has declined about six percent that compared to twenty years ago when cities received twenty percent of their revenue from outside sources. The Manager recalled that financial problems began in the early 1990's, during the recession I 6-22-98 I years, when the State began taking money from cities in the billions of dollars. He noted that property tax is of prime importance to cities, particularly Seal Beach, where sales tax is not as much of a major factor, and the State continues to shift the property tax at an increase of about four to five percent each year, in fact cities have lost $4.6 million in that tax alone over the past six years, another $2 million in redevelopment property tax. He noted that the State has also eliminated liquor license fees, cigarette taxes, trailer coach/mobile home fees, etc., that amounts to about $300 million to cities statewide, this City has lost $8.3 million cumulatively since 1992, on-going and increasing. He noted the impact only from a personnel standpoint has been a reduction of administrative staff from eighteen to about eleven, the same degree of reduction has been realized by the Public Works and Police Departments, the total personnel loss over the past twenty years is from one hundred sixty-four to one hundred. Photos were shown of debris deposited on the beach by winter storm surf, hand raking of the beach, pier needs, an exposed, disintegrated sewer line, vehicles in need of replacement, etc. The Manager mentioned that inasmuch as the City has done nothing to increase sales tax over the past twenty years and with the State take away, a decline of services can be seen. Traditionally only about thirty-six percent of the City budget is discretionary, sixty-four percent is restricted funds that can be expended only for specific purposes, of the discretionary funds about fifty- eight percent goes to public safety, as to property tax paid in California about fourteen percent is paid to cities, a little more than fifteen percent to Seal Beach, thirty-five percent goes to school districts, eighteen percent to State education, ten percent to community college districts1 the City gets one percent of sales tax, the State is six percent, Orange County is seven and three quarters percent, and a recent news article ranked Seal Beach as thirtieth of thirty- one cities in the County. I I In summary, the Manager reported the anticipated revenue is $25.8 million, the General Fund is projected at $13 million, adding in the enterprise funds, public liability, and capital improvements, the total projected expenditures is $29.3 million, again, fifty-eight percent of the discretionary funds are for public safety. He explained that this budget commences the third year of the five year Capital Improvement Program, the attempt is to address some of the deferred maintenance problems, wood and concrete needs on the pier, a beach rake in need of replacement, parking lot repairs, upgrading of City entry ways, Seal Beach Boulevard, the lack of a median, landscaping, park facilities, playground equipment, tennis court repairs, asphalt parkways, cracking streets, improvements to alleyways, drainage problems throughout the City, trees destroying the curbs and sidewalks, there is a storm drain master plan underway that will be of assistance, there is encouragement for investment in the infrastructure, public investment as well, some . serious neglect that the City is attempting to address over time. This budget too attempts to replace to some degree the necessary City reserve funds. There being no public comments, Mayor Brown declared the public hearing closed. In response to Councilmember Campbell, the Manager said there had only been one change to the Capital Improvement Plan as a result of the budget workshops therefore that portion of the budget should be finalized in a few days. With regard to the Pavement 6-22-98 Management Program, the Director of Public works reported that to be in the process of revamping as is required to be done by the Orange County Transportation Authority in order to be eligible for Measure M funding, at this point more detailed and sophisticated data is being collected, the long term, revised Management Plan is expected to be completed by mid-August, in the meantime some streets are coming up for I slurry seal. As to why some streets are sealed for a second or third time before others are repaved, the Director explained that this program takes into consideration the cost/benefit ratio, some streets do not look bad however may be on the verge of rapid deterioration, those will need to be rebuilt, whether that takes place now or in the future does not matter a great deal from a cost standpoint, the savings to the City is realized when a street can be caught before it reaches that point, that the reason slurry seal is used in order to get a few more years out of pavement life. There are factors involved in selecting a street, the condition as well as the amount of traffic, it is known that cul-de-sacs are a concern in College Park East, however of priority is collector streets that are driven every day, they need to be kept in the best of condition, therefore are often maintained before other streets in need, yet efforts will be made to include some of the less traveled streets in future projects. Councilman Boyd said his concern too was with the Capital Improvement Program budget, he had wanted to look at the line items, was told that Seal Beach Boulevard was included, District One seems to have the greatest number of forthcoming capital projects, that likely because it is the oldest section of town, and noted this involves some substantial investment of grant monies, Measure M, etc. in the roadways, I etc. He said although he wanted to see some alley rehabilitation, the storm drain master plan is being awaited, that comes first then possibly alley rehab in the next fiscal budget. It was noted that should the budget receive approval it should be with the understanding that there will be additional information forthcoming as to future projects, etc. for Council consideration. Councilman Boyd pointed out that there are programs that will be looked at that will possibly provide some cost savings, such savings hoped to be reinvested in the community, and reminded that the State is presently looking to take away approximately $1.3 million of vehicle license fees, if so, that would typically come out of the Capital budget. Councilman Doane said his intent was to concentrate on how the City can make money rather than spend money, and recalled a past promise to his constituents that he would not vote for a budget that did not include a reduction of the utility users tax, however said he was satisfied with the comments of the new members of the Council during the budget workshops and definite concern with generating new revenue sources, therefore would vote for approval of the budget however will continue to look to the next budget that will hopefully identify means of generating enough other income to allow a reduction of the utility tax, I even if merely a percent. Councilman Boyd moved that prior to the adoption of the 1999/00 budget there be a comprehensive utility users tax review as to the feasibility of the reduction of same by at least one percent, that would be a reduction of City revenue by about $350,000, and that a workshop be held in six months for that purpose, also, to adopt Resolution Number 4644 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 BUDGET, SETTING APPROPRIATION LIMITATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING FOR 6-22-98 APPROPRIATIONS BY FUND." Councilman Doane seconded the motion. By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4644 was waived. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried ITEM "N" - ACQUISITION - TELEPHONE SYSTEM Councilman Boyd requested a staff report relating to the acquisition of a new telephone system for all departments within the City. Councilman Doane moved to rescind the prior action on Item "N", inadvertently included on the Consent Calendar, to allow for separate consideration. Councilman Boyd seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried I The Assistant to the City Manager presented a summary of the staff report and background leading to the staff recommendation to select the Norstar System with voicemail for the City's telecommunication services. He noted having met with the various City departments to ascertain their communication needs and desires, taking into consideration comments of citizens as well, thereafter the services desired were analyzed with General Telephone and three options were chosen for consideration, an upgrade of the current Meridian system, the Norstar system with Voicemail, and Centranet Service with Centigram voicemail. After further research and comparison the unanimous decision was that the Norstar System with voicemail would best serve the needs of the City, it is available on a lease/purchase basis rather than straight purchase, no capital outlay, the system is adaptable to future technological improvements, GTE assumes maintenance and repair of the system for the term of the agreement, the monthly cost is the lowest of the three options, $257 less than the current two systems. The system provides voicemail, no charge for message retrieval, departments can communicate internally, the switchboard can operate manually or with the automated attendant, to which he emphasized that it is not the intent of staff to rely on automated service or voicemail as a principal means of communication, rather, used only when persons are away from their telephones, and battery packs will be installed on the system to assure that it will operate up to four hours in the event of a power failure. The Assistant again recommended approval of the Norstar System which will improve responsiveness, customer satisfaction, while saving money at the same time. In response to Councilmember Campbell the City Manager confirmed that lease/purchase of the equipment_ is preferred even though the dollar difference of a direct purchase. It was clarified that the existing system is fourteen years old and technology has changed considerably. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the five year lease/purchase agreement with General Telephone Company to acquire the Norstar System with Voicemail for a total monthly cost of $2,976. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried 6-22-98 PUBLIC HEARING / ORDINANCE NUMBER 1433 - EXTENDING MORATORIUM - MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Mayor Brown declared the public hearing open to consider the extension of Ordinance Number 1432 by the adoption of Ordinance Number 1433 with regard to the extension of a moratorium relating to three-story structures in the Main Street Specific Plan area. The City Clerk certified that I notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, and reported no communications received relating to this item. The Director of Development Services reported that the purpose of this hearing is to consider extension of Ordinance 1432 which has the effect of prohibiting the City from approving plans for new three-story commercial buildings on Main Street, with the exception of one building that has gone through the review process at the City and Coastal Commission levels, that structure excluded in the initially adopted ordinance. It was noted that an extension would be for ten months and fifteen days as called for by the Government Code, the period of time would allow the City to review standards that would be desirable for Main Street by either not allowing three story buildings or allowing them under certain circumstances, that process would require public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council levels, would require environmental documentation to be prepared, and that process in and of itself could not be done within the forty-five day time period under Ordinance 1432. It was noted that the Planning Commission discussed this matter at their June 17th meeting, a draft of same provided the Council for information. Mayor Brown invited members of the audience wishing to speak I to this item to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Ms. Geri West, Electric Avenue, stated her support for extension of the moratorium. Ms. West noted she had been a member of the 1983/84 Ad Hoc Main Street Study, the City retained consultant services, and the resulting report was submitted in 1984, about a year of study in addition to staff time. She said the consensus of the committee was to allow only two story structures on Main Street, the Commission staff report of this June 17th quotes that 'the direction from the Council was to only allow two- story structures,' in other words someone did not follow through with ordinance provisions to limit the commercial area to a certain number of stories. With this knowledge, Ms. West questioned why the building at 328 Main Street was even considered, thus, why did the committee waste their time with the study and how much tax payer money will it cost to have staff research, report, and hold more public hearings, how much more public input is needed, why not simply do what should have been done years ago, adopt an ordinance limiting the buildings in the commercial area of Main Street to two stories, and instruct staff to not issue the permit to construct 328 Main. Ms. Mitzi Morton, 13th Street, expressed her support for extending the moratorium, and if the I ordinance is adopted for health, safety, and welfare reasons, then 328 Main Street should not be excluded as no grading or building permits have been issued as of this date. She said most know that three stories are not allowed on Main Street, no one has made such application since the Task Force Study in 1984, and being a controversial issue and with parking on the second story, stated her opinion that the Planning Commission should have had the opportunity to consider the matter, nor did they have the Coastal Commission report, which was given the Council at this meeting, and noted that the Coastal report cited the parking as unusual and 6-22-98 I inconvenient to use, only trained persons should operate the lift, and no one should ride the lift, which she said would require the vehicle occupant to walk the two stories. The Coastal report cited further that if parking were not convenient it will not be used, further, the parking plan is controversial and likely not to be fully implemented, the report went further however to request final approval of the parking plan from the City, to which she questioned who is the City, does staff speak for the Planning Commission and the Council without input. Ms. Morton noted that the Coastal report had to be obtained from that agency as it was not on file in City Hall, the report should be brought before the Planning Commission, and requested Council review of same. Mr. Roger West, Electric Avenue, spoke for extension of the moratorium, also elimination of the exemption for the application for a three story building with a second story parking structure at 328 Main as no building permit has yet been issued. He claimed that this application process began in 1997, that discussions and correspondence took place between City departments, the Coastal Commission, architects and contractors, the Planning Commission was not aware of this proposal, nor had records of the Task Force recommendations been reviewed. Given the monies expended over the years for consultants, the time devoted by the citizens, the consensus has always been that there be no three story structures on Main Street, and at no time has anyone proposed second story parking or a vehicle lift for buildings on Main Street. He claimed in a small city with a small staff the officials should have the judgment to discern controversy and do something about it. Mr. West asked that this matter be continued and that the moratorium be extended. There being no further comments, Mayor Brown declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Boyd emphasized his support for the moratorium extension in that he did not believe that three story buildings belong on Main Street, 328 Main presents a problem, public comments report that neither grading or building permits have been issued as yet, to which he then questioned the exemption from a legal standpoint. The Director of Development Services confirmed no permit issuance, as was reported at a previous meeting, and suggested a response of the City Attorney as to legal grounds, however from a policy standpoint he explained that the exemption has been utilized by the Council to this point in time in cases of an urgency ordinance being adopted relating to a planning issue as an example, the Council has taken the position that when an application has been in the approval process yet permits had not been issued, the project would be allowed to go forward and permits obtained under the previous standards, the policy has been to not reject those in the process, this particular project has been through staff review, has gone through a hearing at the Coastal Commission, has been in plan check for some time. Mayor Brown questioned the comment that most everyone in Seal Beach knew that there were not to be third stories on Main Street. The Manager responded that discussions relating to this issue took place in 1984, in 1995 there was an update of the Main Street Specific Plan, many staff persons have come and gone since then, neither the Director or himself were with the City in 1984 and the issue was never discussed in 1995, nor was there any readily available record of the committee consensus in 1984, just the City Code which dealt only with building heights. The Mayor questioned why historical data was not reviewed during the preparation of the 1995 Plan. Councilmember Campbell offered I I 6-22-98 her thought that the third story was a moot point because of the parking situation. The Manager said he felt that parking has been the natural limiter over time, what was once called a parking in-lieu program is now a parking impact fee that creates the natural limit on a change of occupancy or intensification of use of a commercial building, if more parking is needed that requires payment into a fund that is I to eventually create more parking, this is also a preventative of people requesting occupancy of all levels of a thirty-foot high building, the height has existed for a long time yet there has been no specifics as to how many stories could be housed in a thirty foot building. He noted in this case the applicant approached the City proposing a three story building with retail, office, and parking uSe, the City Code was researched by staff, no provisions were found that would prohibit the project, therefore deemed to be an administrative action, not a discretionary act that would require consideration by the Planning Commission or City Council, thereafter the persons who spoke at this meeting approached the City and advised of the past Task Force discussions and recommendation, it was then that consideration was given to holding up this issue for further review and a possible policy decision, however at that point there was the application for the three level building, one level for the purpose of parking off-street rather than paying into a fund that mayor may not one day be used for new parking facilities, at that point further discussion led to the moratorium. Councilman Boyd pointed out that the 328 Main Street property is a vacant lot, the project description of the Coastal Commission was a 7,635 square foot, three story, thirty foot high commercial building with 703 square I feet of retail space on the first floor, 1,804 square feet of office space on the third floor with an open balcony, and ten indoor parking spaces, three on the first floor, seven on the second floor including a car lift which is proposed to function as a tenth parking space. He offered that his understanding has been that if a project is in the process it needs to be allowed to go forward and the moratorium does not apply, however after further consideration it is felt that in this case the moratorium does apply, the moratorium enacted because it was not realized that someone would make such a proposal. He claimed to be an advocate of property rights, however also supportive of this community in terms of its atmosphere, the desire for a two story limit goes back fifteen years, and what is a concern with the 328 Main project is instead of significant retail it is only seven hundred square feet, and whether it be true or not, what is foreseen is construction of a parking garage for personal use, the majority of the building space, the retail is secondary, there is nothing written that states'the parking must be open to the public, that is not what the people of Old Town want. It was asked if it would be better to have a two story structure with parking on the roof. The response was some uncertainty, however Councilman Boyd said he still I felt this project falls within the realm of the moratorium. He expressed his view that the intent of the Main Street Specific Plan was a two story limit even though it was not specified, that within the thirty foot height limit area, and pointed out that residential areas have a twenty-five foot height requirement which limits what can be built. He explained his opinion that the intent of the two stories was felt to be in keeping with the spirit of the law, the commercial building height from the 1984 study was recommended at twenty-five for stories with five feet for architectural structure, and there are buildings that conform 6-22-98 I to those standards. The Director of Development Services confirmed that the intent as explained appeared to be the thought process that was reflected in the minutes of the 1984 meetings, however the Code of the City was not amended to reflect the same, there is a thirty foot height limit but nothing specifying the number of stories, however provisions of the Building Code define the height of a story, three stories would be relatively easy to provide in a thirty-foot structure, again, concurred that parking was likely the limiting factor in the past, yet this applicant decided to provide parking as a primary use of the property rather than pay the parking fee. Providing parking that is not readily available to the public was again questioned. The Director noted that in order to obtain a building permit the applicant must provide a certain number of parking spaces for the specific uses and it must be publicly accessible, otherwise the payment of the parking fee per space would be required to obtain the building permit. Question was raised as to the procedure should the parking lift attendant, in turn the on- site parking, not be available. Councilman Boyd noted that parking in the downtown area is primarily one hour, however even if the parking at 328 Main is referred to as public parking there may never be a space available for the public at any hour, any time, questioning again who this parking is for. Councilman Doane noted that the 328 Main Street property was first exempted from the moratorium, now it is being considered to be included, yet the property owner is not even present, there is a supposition as to his intent, therefore this item should be continued to allow him to present his side. Councilmember Campbell said all of the possibilities of the land use need to be looked at and the 328 property should be included in the moratorium. As to the time frame of a moratorium, the Assistant City Attorney advised that Ordinance 1432 is effective for a period of forty-five days, concluding July 9th, agreed that the person whose property is affected does have the right to be heard, an option would be to hold an adjourned meeting prior to July 9th on this matter, or, extend the moratorium by the adoption of Ordinance 1433 then amend that Ordinance at a later date if the 328 property is to be removed from the exemption, the complication is that there is a permit application pending. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to continue the public hearing on this item until June 30th at 4:00 p.m., directed staff to notify the applicant of same, also to not issue building permits. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane None Yost Motion carried The Council, by consensus, agreed to allow an additional comment from a member of the audience. I Ms. Mitzi Morton requested that the Council review the Coastal Commission staff reports, one sets forth restrictions, it is believed that the reason the permit has not yet been issued is because the plans have been changed as they relate to the parking lift, the parking will be for employees, and the attendant is an automated device. Mayor Brown asked that staff verify whether or not changes have been made to the plans and any further action taken by the Coastal Commission prior to June 30th. 6-22-98 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS No other Oral Communications were presented. COUNCIL CONCERNS Noting the adoption of the 1998/99 budget, Councilman Boyd requested that reports relating thereto continue to be forthcoming from staff, suggested that a zone text amendment be considered relating to height variations, that coupled with the cupola issue, to further define an architectural feature, how high, how large, etc., yet allowing acceptable variations, this would provide further guidance for the Planning Commission and Council. It was clarified that the request of staff would be for a report of various ideas for consideration prior to forwarding the item to the Commission, such report to Council within sixty to seventy-five days if possible. Councilman Boyd said the status of the Hellman project is not presently known, he then made reference to a proposed development adjacent to Seal Beach in the area of Marina Drive at the marina, a controversial project that has been fast tracked by the City of Long Beach to develop a three story, forty-four room executive type hotel, Seal Beach has not taken a formal position on this development however is' likely to be a matter of future discussion, and offered that any interested person may wish to contact the Save The Bay Committee. Councilmember Campbell reported that Peggy Ducey and Bob Burnham of Newport Beach will be providing an update on the El Toro reuse plan on Tuesday, June 30th, and to that the Mayor requested that any presentation be limited to about thirty minutes. Councilmember Campbell expressed appreciation to the Public Works Department for their quick attention to the clearing of weeds and brush on the south side of Lampson between Candleberry and Heather and the north side between Heather and Arbor Park. She also reported attending an extraordinary Eagle Scout Court of Honor at the Buddhist Church in Anaheim to honor and commend College Park East resident Shigeto Todd Yanai and ten other Eagle Scouts, their Troop has a membership of about seventy boys and most of them have thirty to forty merit badges where only twenty- one are required to earn the Eagle Award. Mayor Brown inquired as to the location of the Coastal Commission meeting at which the Hellman project will again be considered, to which the City Manager responded that the location will likely be Eureka in about ninety days. The Mayor noted also that due to the El Nino conditions this year there has been an unusual number of mosquitos breeding on the Naval Support Facility and commended the Vector Control District for response and treatment of the area nearly every day. Councilman Boyd welcomed back to Seal Beach the Association of Volleyball Professionals Tournament. I I ADJOURNMENT It was the consensus of the Council to adjourn the meeting until Tuesday, June 30th at 4:00 p.m. to meet in a workshop session. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meetin~9:34 p.m. I Clerk and the City of Approved. ~ utJ~ Mayor clerk 6-22-98 / 6-30-98 Attest: I Seal Beach, California June 30, 1998 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 4:00 p.m. with Mayor Brown calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Brown Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost Absent: None Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk I APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Brown made reference to the agenda item relating to a status report on the EI Toro Reuse Plan, advised those present that there had been a misunderstanding as to the focus of discussion, the intent had been to merely review the procedures, not a discussion of taking a position on a Plan, and that this item will be continued to an unspecified date without discussion at this meeting. Brown moved, second by Campbell, to approve the order of the agenda as revised pursuant to Mayor Brown's statement. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane, Yost None Motion carried WAIVER OF FULL READING Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to waive the 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 reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Brown, Campbell, Doane, Yost None Motion carried I CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING I ORDINANCE NUMBER 1433 - MORATORIUM - THREE STORY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES - MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Mayor Brown declared the continued public hearing open to consider extension of the moratorium on three story structures within the Main Street Specific Plan Area. The City Clerk certified that notice of the continued hearing had been posted as required, and reported no communications received. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report that reviewed the moratorium currently in place, the impacts of the moratorium on the property located at 328