Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1993-05-24 5-10-93 I 5-24-93 signature. The Mayor advised that the letter must be in the hands of the County by May 29th. Councilmember Hastings moved to direct that a letter be prepared for the signature of the Mayor and forwarded to the Orange County Board of Supervisors in support of the City of Huntington Beach position. Mayor Forsythe seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried I ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. CLOSED SESSION No Closed Session was held. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting until Monday, May 24th at 6:00 p.m. to meet in Closed Session. By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m. Clerk and ex-off1c1o of Seal Beach Approved: _ <%Uh / ~~~. Attest: 1 Seal Beach, California May 24, 1993 The regular adjourned session scheduled for 6:00 p.m. this was cancelled as there were no Closed Session items for discussion. date rk .1 I I I 5-24-93 Seal Beach, California May 24, 1993 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CJI T.T. Present: Mayor Forsythe Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Hastings Councilman Laszlo Absent: Doane moved, second by Brown, to excuse the absence of Mr. Laszlo from this meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried Also present: Mr. Bankston, city Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk The Mayor announced that the public hearing relating to the appeal of BJ's Chicago Pizzeria will be continued until the next meeting as requested by the applicant. Mayor Forsythe welcomed Capt. Hampe, Seal Beabh Naval Weapons Station, present to comment on the recently announced inclusion of the Seal Beach Naval Weapons station on the Defense Base Closure list. Capt. Hampe acknowledged the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission announcement which he said occurred after review of the installations owned and operated by the Department of Defense and hopefully an objective analysis of how those installations contribute to the defense of the country. He noted that since 1991 this review is held every other year to assess the installations and the size of armed forces felt to be needed in comparison to the threat the Department of Defense feels exists in the world at that particular time. The captain reported Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach is one of five weapons stations operating within the continental limits of the United states, generally to maintain ordnance material for the Navy. Capt. Hampe noted that Seal Beach had not been nominated for closure or realignment by the Navy, in fact no weapons facility had been named, the explanation of the Navy team having been that the weapons stations were determined to be strategic logistics sites, important to the peacetime readiness and wartime sustainability of the Navy forces. The Captain expressed confidence that having been placed on the list does not jeopardize the mission of station Seal Beach, however it is likely that some portion of the present workload will be reviewed for streamlining, consolidation, elimination, or modification. He offered that additional information should be available within a couple of weeks. In response to questions of Council, the Captain pointed out that the Seal Beach facility was specifically listed rather than the Seal Beach complex which includes installations in other locations for which Seal Beach is command headquarters, and unofficial comments have indicated that Seal Beach was placed on the list because it is only at this location that certain types of depot maintenance is performed, which could make Seal Beach subject to some type of consolidation. with regard to a statement that the Navy is reducing its redundant facilities and infrastructure whereby consolidations could then 5-24-93 come about, question was posed as to whether the station could accommodate other military services. The captain confirmed that there are some buildings that are not being utilized to the fullest and with some minor modification between five to six hundred additional people could be accommodated, and added that particularly since the Desert Shield/Storm operations ther~/are a number of technically qualified persons at the station ~at' I perform various projects for the Army and Air Force branches such as stockpile assessment, ammunition testing, etc. which could ' result in a growth opportunity for the Station. Mayor Forsythe \ expressed appreciation for Capt. Hempe's comments, and requested that any further information be forwarded to the City. WAIVER OF FULL READING Hastings moved, second by Brown, 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: ABSENT : Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Jerry Dominguez, Seal Beach resident and Southern California Edison Area Manager, announced the 15th annual Run & Ride Benefit for the City of Hope to be held on June 12th, El Dorado Park, Long Beach, commencing at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Dominguez invited the attendance of the members of the Council and provided each with a commemorative tee shirt. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS COUNCIL REORGANIZATION I Selection of Havor Councilman Doane nominated Mayor ProTem Hastings for the position of Mayor. Mayor ProTem Hastings expressed appreciation for the honor however declined the nomination citing personal obligations at this time that would impact execution of the mayoral duties. Councilman Doane nominated Mrs. Forsythe to continue in the position of Mayor for an additional term, and moved to close nominations. councilman Brown seconded the motion. Mayor Forsythe accepted the nomination with appreciation. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Hastings None Forsythe Laszlo Motion carried Mrs. Forsythe was declared Mayor for a second term of 1993/94. Selection of Mavor ProTem Councilman Brown nominated Mr. Doane for the position of Mayor I ProTem, and moved to close nominations. Mayor Forsythe seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Brown, Forsythe, Hastings None Doane Laszlo Motion carried Councilman Doane was declared Mayor ProTem for 1993/94. I I I 5-24-93 APPOINTMENTS - AD HOC TOBACCO CONTROL COMMITTEE Doane moved, second by Brown, to appoint Ms. Sheri Nemirow, President of the Chamber of Commerce, and Mr. Tom Charara, Main Street Deli, to the Ad Hoc Tobacco Control Committee. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Councilman Doane nominated Ms. Shirley Benjamin, Del Monte Drive, to fill the District Five appointee vacancy on the Archaeological Advisory Committee. Brown moved, second by Hastings, to confirm the appointment. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "c" thru "J" Brown moved, second by Doane, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented. C. Approved regular demands numbered 2127 through 2238 in the amount of $208,423.42 and payroll demands numbered 1558 through 1730 in the amount of $280,694.45 as approved by the Finance Committee, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. Approved the minutes of the regular adjourned session of May 3, 1993 and the regular session of May 10, 1993. E. Approved the plans and specifications for Project Number 636, Reconstruction of Ocean Avenue Alley and Marina Drive Storm Drain, and authorized the'city Manager to advertise for bids. D. F. Received and filed the report relating to the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center, Installation Restoration Program, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. Introduced and approved first reading of Ordinance Number 1368 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13D, ADDING A NEW SECTION 13D-11 TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH REGARDING THE SOUNDING OF MOTOR VEHICLE BURGLAR ALARMS AND RENUMBERING EXISTING SECTIONS 13D-11 THROUGH 13D-15 TO NEW SECTION 13D-12 TO 13D-16, RESPECTIVELY, AND MAKING TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS TO NEW SECTIONS 13D-15 AND 13D-16." By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinance Number 1368 was waived. G. H. Adopted Resolution Number 4224 entitled "PROVIDING FOR THE BORROWING OF FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-1994 AND THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF 1993 TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION 5-24-93 NOTES THEREFORE. II By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4224 was waived. I. Received and filed the status report on the Orange county Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) Implementation Strategy, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality control Board for i~formation purposes. J. Adopted Resolution Number 4225 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR FULL-TIME, PART-TIME EMPLOYEES AS WELL AS ELECTED OFFICIALS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 3644." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4225 was waived. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried The City Manager confirmed that effort is being made to arrange a presentation by County staff relating to the Air Quality Management Plan at one of the June meetings. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-1 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Mayor Forsythe declared the public hearing open to consider I General Plan Amendment 93-1, Amendments to the Growth Management Element of the General Plan. 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 Director of Development Services presented the staff report, explained that the changes basically consist of clarification of various definitions, a required bi- annual review rather than an annual review, and reference to the 1993 Program Implementation Manual rather than the 1991 Manual. He noted that the amendments will allow the City to maintain eligibility for the receipt of Measure M funds. . In response to questions posed by Council, the Director explained that the level of service of certain roadways eligible for Measure M funding is monitored annually, under that program Orange County monitors Pacific Coast Highway through Seal Beach, and other local qualifying roadways are monitored by the City every other year; that a development south of this community that could impact northbound Pacific Coast Highway with a substantial number of vehicle trips would not affect the Seal Beach share of Measure M funds, such development projects the responsibility of the approving jurisdiction, with traffic monitored bi-annually, the level of service verified based upon the traffic studies to ensure compliance, and should a greater traffic level be generated, some type of mitigation would be required to bring the I level of service into compliance with the level of service initially anticipated. Mayor Forsythe indicated that the type of mitigation is a concern, especially given the possibility of payment of a mitigation fee in-lieu of actual mitigation measures in the event it is deemed mitigation is not possible. The Director noted that in response to the initial environmental documents for a proposed development south of the City staff had emphasized that the traffic mitigation was felt to be insufficient to meet the demands, and once the new environmental documents are received they will be reviewed with the same intensity to ensure that this City'S concerns are expressed to ,"' I I I 5-24-93 the approving body and the impacts adequately defined. He advised that a development impact fee program for traffic mitigation in Seal Beach, the final component under Measure M, will be considered by the Planning Commission at their next meeting, reporting also that the City of Huntington Beach has adopted their mitigation program which is based on the number of peak hour trips generated by a proposed use, and cited as an example if one hundred fifty-five additional peak hour trips at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard could not be mitigated by roadway refinements, the City would then have the ability to impose a fee on the developer, payable to the City for use in any manner felt to be appropriate to lessen traffic impacts along the PCH corridor. The Director explained there is no specific definition of the term 'Comprehensive Development Plans for Large Projects' at this time, however would likely be in the form of a specific Plan or General Plan Amendment for a change of land use. with regard to denial of a project as a result of impacts to an adjoining community, the Director noted that Measure M allows an approving agency to place conditions on a project where there are impacts on another jurisdiction, yet does not require that agency to do so, explaining further that that agency would be allowed to prepare a statement of overriding considerations identifying impacts that can not be mitigated however approval of the project is intended, and other than that provision of law there is little an adjoining city can do to stop the process aside from litigation. There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NUMBER 4226 - AMENDMENTS - GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT - GENERAL PLAN Resolution Number 4226 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE I GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT' OF THE SEAL BEACH GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-1)." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4226 was waived. Brown moved, second by Doane, to adopt Resolution Number 4226 as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL - BJ's CHICAGO PIZZERIA - 209 MAIN STREET Mayor Forsythe declared the public hearing open to consider the appeal of BJ's Chicago Pizzeria to the Planning Commission denial of applications for Conditional Use Permit 92-23, a request to sell alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption and to perform a seismic retrofit to a locally recognized historic structure, and Variance 92-3, a request to vary from the commercial parking requirements, loading zone requirements, and landscaping requirements in conjunction with the re-establishment of a restaurant in a locally recognized historic structure. Brown moved, second by Hastings, to continue the public hearing until the June 14, 1993 meeting as requested by the applicant. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - UTILITY USERS TAX Mayor Forsythe declared the public hearing open to consider adjustment of the Utility Users Tax by an amount up to six (6) percent. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, and reported receipt of one written communication in opposition to the utility Users Tax and any increase of same. The City Manager described 5-24-93 the request to be considered as an adjustment of the existing five percent utility Users Tax to eleven percent and extending the taxable utilities to include fixed cellular phone charges. At the request of the Council, the city Manager read the first page of his report which in part declared that "but for the dysfunctional state government and their inability to come to grips with the fiscal realities facing the state of California I this request would not be made....the direct taking by the state, for the second year, of 'our' citizens locally paid tax dollars is an attack on our ability to be responsive to 'our' citizens service requests." He pointed out that the City has reduced expenditures to meet declining revenues of over $1.7 million since July, 1990, this having occurred even though the city has been required to provide local funding of State and Federally mandated programs, the cost of those programs in the past two years amounting to $950,000, and although the specific impacts of the State budget on the upcoming fiscal year are yet unknown, it is likely the City will face a deficit of about $2 million. From a historical view, the Manager pointed out that City revenues in 1988/89 were $11.1 million, the projected revenue for 1993/94 is $9,811,000, not adjusted for inflation; in years past the average revenue growth rate was about 6 percent; not taking into account the one-time Redevelopment Agency payback to the City in 1990/91, a half percent revenue decline was realized; 5.7 percent in 1991/92; current year revenues are about $400,000 to $500,000 less than had been projected, and a 17.5 percent decline is anticipated for 1993/94; expenditures were reduced by 1.4 percent in fiscal 1991/92, 11.3 percent in the current year, the amount of expenditures comparable to those of 1988/89. The City Manager noted the anticipated state taking of AB8 in 1993/94 is projected to be $850,212 or 28.5 percent of the property tax revenue, the loss last year having been 9 percent; the diversion of I Redevelopment Agency tax increment to the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund of $153,866, the City responsible for the diversion amount when the Agency has insufficient monies to meet the obligation; the approximate $215,000 City administrative charge to the Agency lost as a result of the tax increment diversion; and the loss of the aerospace sales tax rebate to the Federal government of an amount of $495,000 up to $1.1 million, dependant upon the payback term presently being considered by the Supreme Court; just those losses resulting in a $1.7 million shortfall, an amount likened to 1992/93. He reviewed projected figures for 1993/94 fiscal year assuming a 2 percent general revenue growth, estimated revenues by 1992/93 fiscal year end of $11,300,000, General Fund revenue growth of $226,000, the projected loss of $1,714,078, resulting in projected revenues of $9,811,922, that compared to General Fund expenses at the 1992/93 level resulting in a projected deficit of $2,049,163. He pointed out that the projected deficit assumes 1993/94 expenses at the 1992/93 level, does not address inflation, nor additional costs for services or increased charges, using as an example the recent adjusted cost for MWD water which will increase that City expenditure from $332,000 to $825,475. The City Manager reviewed in some detail the measures taken since July, 1990 to reduce expenditures and increase revenues as a result of General Fund shortfalls, options being considered to address the 1993/94 I General Fund shortfall which, even with a six percent increase of the Utility Users Tax, will require further reduction of $300,000 to $400,000. He reviewed also a comparative listing of utility users tax in other cities in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Mayor Forsythe 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. Mr. Gordon Shanks, resident and President of the Seal Beach Homeowners Association, recalled his opposition to implementing the Utility Users Tax initially as he felt there was no financial need at that time. He said however I I I 5-24-93 that times have changed, the City is in financial jeopardy and the Council has very little choice but to raise revenue. Mr. Shanks reported the increase had received unanimous approval of the Homeowners Association, yet suggested that should the financial situation be reversed at some point in the future this Tax should then revert to the five percent. Dr. David Rosenman, 8th street, asked if the financial situation could be perceived to be the result of AB 8, and said that given the alternatives he would reluctantly support the Tax increase, also inquired as to why the Tax is not being applied to cable television as it appears likely additional revenues will be needed within six months. To Dr. Rosenman's comments, the Manager noted that the state has taken considerably more than was received under AB8, that the direction of the Council had been to address the impact of the State taking only, not to necessarily address all other potential increase of charges. He pointed out that the cities having adopted a utility User Tax fall within two categories, those with heavy property tax dependence after Proposition 13, such as Seal Beach, and those that have adopted this tax as a result of State budget impacts, explaining that Seal Beach has absorbed the State mandates and takings through its own budget reductions and now the City is at a point of diminishing returns and liability comes into play. Mr. Dallas Pierce, Rockwell International, Seal Beach, said his firm tries to manage their utilities as best they can, that taxes are built into the utilities, and they exercise cost savings as a result of being a worldwide competitive business. He mentioned to just maintain the Seal Beach site costs $24,720,000 per year which includes property tax, depreciation, maintenance, repair, utilities alone are $4.2 million, and stated if the increase under consideration is adopted the Rockwell share of the total revenue would be about $300,000 or approximately 13 percent of the city's shortfall. Mr. pierce requested that the Council consider other means of raising revenue or that the ordinance be amended to provide tiered rates for large users. Ms. Shari Nemirow, President of the Chamber of Commerce, reported the Chamber voted against the utility Users Tax increase at their last meeting as being a burden on local businesses in a time of recession. Mr. Dave potter, Seal Way, indicated concern with the cumulative effect of raising the utility Users Tax and other forms of fee increases to address the impact of State actions, which he said in effect will let the State off the hook. He suggested other means of lowering expenses could be by reducing the various boards and commissions, for instance the Planning Commission could assume the considerations of the Environmental Quality Control Board, the result being the reduction of staff and meeting time, create a special committee when the need arises, a sunset clause for the increased tax may be appropriate, redefine a job well done, in other words reduce the standard from doing an excellent job to doing a good jOb, possibly decline to implement the programs mandated by the State, and be conscious of proposed legislation, such as the doghouse issue, as it relates to staff research and preparation. Mr. Jerry Dominguez, resident and Area Manager for Southern California Edison, expressed uncertainty as to whether he opposed the utility Tax increase, however noted that 6.5 to 7 percent is about the average, as proposed would double the percentage in Seal Beach and be the highest in Orange County cities, and that the senior citizen population on fixed incomes should be given consideration. Ms. Susan Saldana, Southern California Gas Company, concurred with the remarks of Mr. Dominguez, stated the Gas company is generally not opposed to the utility Users Tax, however it is preferred that the percentage be maintained at about 6 to 7 percent in consideration of their customers and businesses. There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe declared the public hearing closed. 5-24-93 It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to declare a recess at 8:27 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:38 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order. For information of the public Mayor Forsythe announced that Councilman Laszlo is undergoing medical tests, is doing well, and expected to be home within three to four days. Continuing the discussion relating to an increase of the utility Users Tax, each member of the Council expressed their position relating thereto. Members of the Council indicated it is never pleasant to be placed in a position of raising taxes, yet the City can not be jeopardized to the point of bankruptcy; that alternatives had been reviewed in depth however are not viable; and that lobbying efforts are being pursued through the League of California cities relative to state mandates. Council indicated support for a sunset clause or annual review of the Utility Users Tax rate. ORDINANCE NUMBER 1369 - UTILITY USERS TAX - ADJUSTED PERCENTAGE MIl Ordinance Number 1369 was presented to Council entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH INCREASING THE UTILITY USERS TAX AND AMENDING ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 22 (TAXATION) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinance Number 1369 was waived. The City Attorney suggested that language could be added to call for a City Council review of the rates set forth in Sections 22-62(a), 22-63(a) and 22-64(a) on an annual basis, no later than April 30th of each year. Councilman Doane suggested that application of the Utility Users Tax to cable television be given consideration at some point in the future. The city Manager advised that pursuant to provisions of the City Charter, Ordinance Number 1369 would be deemed adopted at this meeting upon a favorable vote of the city Council. Forsythe moved, second by Hastings, to adopt Ordinance Number 1369 as amended to include language calling for an annual review as recommended by the City Attorney. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings None Laszlo Motion carried I.. I. MAIN STREET PARKING As requested by the city Council at the May 10th meeting, the Director of Development Services presented the staff report detailing several short term options to address the Main Street parking issue, describing the potential impacts, implementation method, implementation responsibility, impacted groups, anticipated effectiveness, cost effectiveness, community acceptability, factors .influencing success, and packaging potential. In brief, the proposed actions were: 1) To designate the 8th Street Beach Lot for downtown use after 6:00 p.m. with revised parking fee structure and merchant token/validation program - restructure the lot payment control 1 system to a ticket-in/pay-out system - a tiered parking fee schedule to allow for short-term use at a reasonable cost while permitting continued long-term use - acquisition of new parking fee equipment to accommodate a tiered parking fee and merchant validations - exit from 10th Street Lot prohibited - or an alternative action to - reconfigure the lot to allow approximately 56 short-term parking spaces by meter on the back two rows of the lot - allow approximately 179 long term parking spaces by flat fee on the first four rows of parking from the beach back - relocate the control building/control arms within 1 I .1 5-24-93 the lot - construct a low barrier fence between meter and flat fee parking areas - install signage and parking meters. 2) To open the 8th street Lot south of Central Avenue for pUblic parking after 5:00 p.m. (54 of the 58 spaces), no parking charge initially, investigate potential for parking meters - resign the lot for "permit parking only" from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., unrestricted parking from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 3) To develop a revised residential permit parking program, including guest pass parking component, to encourage greater utilization of available on-site residential parking areas (i.e., garages, carports, etc.) - staff review concludes that existing program is good, does not need modification - option would be to modify program for issuance of permits only for the number of resident vehicles at a particular address which is in excess of the number of provided off-street parking spaces. 4) To review existing on-street parking restrictions on 8th, Main and 10th streets, with goal of discouraging parking on 8th and 10th streets by business customers and/or employees - staff review concludes that current regulations are likely sufficient to deal with most issues of concern - emphasize parking control enforcement of parking restrictions to discourage Main street employees from parking on 8th or 10th streets and/or extend the one hour restriction to later in the evening hours - convert Main street 100 block 42 space parking lot to a metered lot at a .25 cent/15 minute rate - if successful, at some point in future consider meters at the 8th/Central lot for the period of 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 6) To work with business operators to provide additional signage regarding available parking in the alleys and restriping plans to increase the number of spaces available - noted there are a total of 416 alley parking spaces available on both sides of Main street between Ocean Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway - increase signage at intersections of Main street/Electric Avenue, Central Avenue and Ocean Avenue as to the availability of customer parking in the alleys - suggested time limit for alley parking of two hours - discussion/ coordination with the Business Association and impacted property owners - issues of enforcement, liability, public safety, noise requires further study and review. The Director noted that additional time will be needed to investigate the potential utilization of AB 2766 funds, parking in-lieu funds, etc. for establishment of an "Old Town" tram service to reduce vehicle trips within the Old Town/Pacific Coast Highway area, and to investigate the potential of establishing additional bicycle parking areas/lockers at the pier in conjunction with any proposed parking revision plans that impact the beach parking lots. Council inquired as to the cost of staffing the beach parking lot(s), and if those salaries could be paid from the in-lieu monies. The city Attorney indicated it is likely they could, however it would be necessary to review the wording of the in- lieu agreements. The Director noted that the alternative action set forth in the staff report relating to the use of the 8th street lot would likely not be cost effective and would necessitate that the city incur certain costs, therefore the first proposed action would be preferred which allows short-term and long-term use of the lot as well as some credit under the Air Quality Management Plan. staff reported continuing research of tiered parking and metered parking fee schedules of other cities, that other jurisdictions using parking meters claim that they pay for themselves within a year, also that the cities of Huntington 5-24-93 Beach and Long Beach have offered to provide services to collect, count and provide the monies collected to the City for a service fee. Staff reported that the beach parking lot budget is $62,000, $28,000 allocated to street sweeping and about $45,000 for the beach lot attendants. It was suggested that the city- owned parking areas at Main street/Electric Avenue should be treated the same as the lot in the 100 block. The Manager I mentioned that consideration might be given to designate the 1st Street lot for all day parking at a reduced fee and the 8th Street lot short term on an automated pay-as-you-leave basis, that the scheduling of parking contr.ol officers could possibly be staggered for extended patrol, noted that any action taken by the Council at this meeting is not all inclusive solutions, and that work is continuing on the in-lieu, fee schedule, etc., for further Council consideration. with regard to resident restricted parking on 8th and lOth Streets and signage to encourage use of the municipal lot, staff questioned restricting those two streets to residential parking throughout the day, explaining that mornings and after 3:00 p.m. is the heaviest usage, that there is generally adequate available parking from 10:00 a.m. to about 2:00 p.m., and the existing one hour restriction should be adequate between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The Manager noted there may be some enforcement concerns, and given the reduction to five parking control positions, the street sweeping operation is preventing some late afternoon enforcement, however it is hoped the scheduling can be resolved within about two weeks to extend the enforcement period. Staff confirmed that an effort to inform the public of the availability of parking in the beach lots will be part of the signage program; that there are approximately two hundred parking spaces under the various programs that the City is collecting fees on; if the payment I__ system for the beach lot is changed in accordance with the discussion at this meeting, it was clarified that would not create additional spaces yet would change the manner in which those spaces would be used, likely increased usage; and should the Main Street and Electric Avenue lots be metered there would be approximately ninety spaces generating revenue to the city. To the indication by Leisure World residents that they would utilize the beach lots if there was a reduced senior citizen fee, it was suggested that a merchant validation may be easier as it would likely be difficult to verify a persons age at the parking lot. Councilman Doane stated his intent to provide staff with various periodicals he had received relative to long range solutions for parking. A consensus of the Council was indicated to direct staff to initiate implementing a change in the method of payment at the 8th Street Beach Lot, open the Central Avenue/8th Street lot for public use from 5:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m., convert the three city-owned municipal lots, Main Street and Electric Avenue, to metered lots, and commence a signage program for alley and beach parking. It was clarified that the tram service and bicycle parking will be considered at a later date, that staff will prepare a proposed beach/parking lot fee schedule for consideration of the Council, and work with the Business Association to develop a validation program in conjunction with I the 8th Street Beach Lot use and to encourage business customers to use that Lot and the alley parking. Councilmember Hastings requested that the city Attorney investigate the use of in-lieu monies to fund the parking meters, and that an effort be made to upgrade the appearance of the Main Street lot, particularly the portion fronting Main Street, through the use of landscaping. COUNCIL CONCERNS No Council Concerns were presented. I I I . . " 5-24-93 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Dr. David Rosenman, 8th Street, suggested that the automated system with the capability of making change, similar to that used by the City of Laguna Beach, be looked into rather than having a manned booth. He expressed disappointment that there is no proposal to impose resident only parking on 8th and 10th Streets after 6:00 p.m. Mr. Gordon Shanks, Surf Place, stated his support for the City's attempt to solve the in-lieu parking problem, however recommended that that issue be resolved before BJ's Pizza or other Main Street businesses are allowed. with regard to the request to improve landscaping at the Main Street parking lot, he suggested that the Senior and/or Junior Women's Clubs adopt that as a project. Ms. Reva Olson, Seal Beach, cautioned the Council against any parking quick-fix for BJ's Pizza or any other project, as everyone knows that the in-lieu parking program is illegal, there should have been a complete environmental review, and said none of the parking solutions are geared to help the residents. Council confirmed that it was they who suggested the tram service for staff research, however that action is being postponed at this time because of the cost involved. Ms. Olson objected to a tram. Mr. Bill Senyak, with his spouse, soon to be residents of 7th Street, expressed opposition to the opening of the 8th Street/Central Avenue parking lot to the public given its proximity to residential properties. Mr. Dave Potter, Seal Way, suggested that the systems used for beach parking areas all along the coast be looked into. Mr. Mario Voce, Catalina Avenue, suggested that the businesses backing to Main Street alleys be prodded into cleaning and opening up the alley parking areas. He recalled the positive measures that were implemented to improve traffic, etc. when the Olympics were held in Los Angeles. Mr. Voce also said he did not believe that responsible people should allow their Main Street businesses to be boarded up, the Rum Runners another example, and the property owner(s) should be required to maintain the location in an acceptable manner until a new business is approved. Ms. Gail Ayres, Central Avenue, thanked the Council for addressing the parking problem, and agreed that there should be resident targeted parking on 8th, 10th and other streets that have parking problems. There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications closed. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn until Monday, June 14th at 6:00 p.m. to meet in Closed Session. The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:53 p.m. Clerk and ex of 1 of Seal Beach Approved: _~,." / ~""~'*' n Mayor Attest: