HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Residential Piers - CorrespondenceiLt9.�^
Information about Newport Island — Rent valuations for residential piers (November 20, 2012)
From: ]amesBNetzerCalaol.com lmailto:JamesBNetzer(0aol.coml
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 9:30 AM
To: Kiff, Dave
Cc: James13Netzer0)aol.com
Subject: Re: Residential Pier Appraisal Question
Dave,
On the basis of my research the docks owners in Balboa Coves and around Newport Island that rent their
docks get the same rent per lineal foot as those in other areas of the harbor. In general, they also have
smaller tidelands area compared to other areas in the harbor. I did not find any market evidence to
suggest that they should pay a lower rent per square foot due to the location. On an absolute basis they
pay less rent because they generally have smaller tidelands.
Regards,
Jim Netzer
From: Gary Rasmuson [ mailto :oarvCclrasmusonaooraisal.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 9:50 AM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: Re: Residential Pier Appraisal Question
Dave,
I don't think any adjustment to the rent rate on a rent/SF basis would be warranted. You are
leasing tideland area for a residential pier, regardless of the size of the boat. The size of the pier
area will be smaller in this area and if leased on a rent/SF basis, this would adjust to a lower rent
than other larger piers in Newport Harbor.
Gary Rasmuson, MAI, SPA
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
Rasmuson Appraisal Services
7830 Westside Drive, #303
San Diego, CA 92108
Brown, Leilani
From:
Harp, Aaron
Sent:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:05 PM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Cc:
Torres, Michael
Subject:
FW: City Considering Imposing Dock Tax on Residential Dock Owners?
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jim Flaherty" <Jim@Jim- Flaherty.com>
Date: November 20, 2012, 12:14:11 PM PST
To: <CityCouncil a,newportbeachca.gov >, "Kiff, Dave" <DKiffa,newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: City Considering Imposing Dock Tax on Residential Dock Owners?
To Whom It May Concern -
I just caught wind of this absurdity. It's not enough to tax Newport Harbor business owners to death, now
it's time to pick on the residential dock owners?
Because of your collective ineptitude in solving City budget problems, we the private dock owners in the
harbor are supposed to step up and bail you out? This is an absurdity of the greatest length. I don't recall
if City Manager is an elected position but we the people did not elect the City Council to tax us to death.
At one time you were all "community members ". Oh what a power position can do to people.
Congratulations, you're now in the "self- serving greedy politician" category...
I will be attending every City Council meeting regarding this issue. I have alerted all my neighbors to
this complete and utter nonsense. Expect a backlash like you've never seen before.
Jim Flaherty
Bayside Drive
Corona Del Mar
Brown, Leilani
From:
Harp, Aaron
Sent:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:06 PM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Cc:
Torres, Michael
Subject:
FW: JC Comments For Private Pier Meeting
Attachments:
Questions.pdf
From: John Corrough rmailto:jcorrouoh(alaol.com]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 12:39 PM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: JC Comments For Private Pier Meeting
Dave: Here is an early copy of comments I will make /submit at today's workshop on Private Piers. Nothing new or
earthshaking from what has been discussed before, except for #4 which CNB needs to take a good look at. Like the
commercial guys, no everybody out here with a pier is a millionaire in cash terms and while paying one's fair share is
appropriate, I think we all need to acknowledge that we are now paying for the past NB CC and staff "sleeping in the sun"
with regard to the Harbor. One of my first questions to Norma Glover 16 years ago was "what is all this controversy about
Tidelands, and why do we only pay $65 /year for a pier permit? I was advised by others in the room to keep quiet ..... and
learn.
John Corrough
Brown, Leilani
From:
Harp, Aaron
Sent:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:06 PM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Cc:
Torres, Michael
Subject:
FW: Residential Pier Workshop, 11/1
Begin forwarded message:
From: Portcalypso(@aol.com
Date: November 20, 2012, 12:24:28 PM PST
To: MHenn(i�NewportBeachCa.gov, NGardner @NewportBeachCa.aov, lesheidai le c,aol.com,
EdSelich(@roadrunner.com, rhill ,newportbeachca.eov, curryk(a,pfin.com,
SRosansky(oNewportB eachCa. eov
Cc: dkiff(cDcity.newport- beach.ca.us, gary a,mhsherman.com, tom(@curcicompanies.com,
Newpobay (@sbcelobal.net, marina(@,1idonarkul ace. com, cannervt @earthlink.net,
Terri .PCandMPmarinas(@,,yalioo.com, robinlombardoI 1(@gmail.com, rllounsburv(@,,msn.com,
duffyRduffyboats.com, rtmccaffreya,yahoo.com, johnvallely ,me.com,
rluehrs@newpor-tbeach.com
Subject: Re: Residential Pier Workshop, 11/1
To: Mayor Gardner and Councilman Henn
CC: Other Members of the Newport Beach City Council and Mr. Kiff
Re: Residential Pier Workshop, 11/19/12
At the Workshop meeting yesterday afternoon we touched on the fact that, along with the
new residential pier rate structure, the City is planning to propose that the NBMC be
amended to make it legal for any residential pier owner to make commercial use of
his /her slip(s) by renting it to a boat owner tenant. The explanation by Mr. Henn for this
proposed change was that, for many years, even though it has been illegal to do, an
unknown number of residential slip owners have been renting their residential slips
while the City has never or, as corrected by counsel, almost never, enforced the code
prohibiting this practice. And, therefore, it was reasoned that, since it is known that
some of the 1200 private slip owners in the Harbor are currently ignoring the code, the
City should solve this problem by amending the code to make the practice legal. In
other words, if pier owners are breaking the law and we are unable or unwilling to
control it, let's simply solve the noncompliance problem by making illegal, legal.
Next, when asked if these residential slips converted to commercial slips would be
charged the commercial marina tidelands rent of approximately $1.26 /sf.(approximate
small marina rate when fully phased -in), rather than the $0.525/sf proposed.for private
slips used by their owners, the answer was "No ". And, it was then pointed out that this
disparity in rentlsf would obviously put the commercial slip operators at a
significant competitive disadvantage with any of the 1200 private slip owners who decide
to rent out their slips. A disadvantage, I must add, that is compounded by the fact
that commercial marinas are charged on the basis of total sf of tidelands water
and, as proposed, private slips will be charged on the basis of the total of dock and
ramp sf plus the sf of a 10' so- called "Berthing area" around the dock.
Using the General Example distributed at the Workshop meeting, a commercial marina
utilizing the 3000 feet of total tidelands water space set forth in the City example would
pay (at the small marina rate) a rental fee of $3,780/yr, while the private pier owner
pays $872/yr for slip(s) located within 3000sf of tidelands water space ..... in effect,
$1.26/sf for commercial and $0.29 for private slips being used commercially
By any reasonable measure, this proposal, one that encourages private slip rentals
with an illegal to legal code change and a tidelands rental rate effectively over
400% less that charged for commercial slip marinas, is extremely inequitable to the
commercial marinas in the Harbor. And add to this that the typical private slip
owner renting to a tenant does not and will not provide parking or the restroom
facilities and trash disposal service required for commercial marina operations.
I suggest that the easiest and most equitable solution is to leave the current NBMC code
in place (it's reasonable to assume that there was and still are very good reasons that it
was put in place and kept in place for alt these years) while strengthening it's
enforcement with appropriate verbiage in the proposed Residential Tidelands Pier
Permit. Certainly, this a more sensible approach to this issue than for the City to,
in essence, encourage and reward commercial use of private slips without having
any measure of control over their operation ..... in effect, allowing them to operate
like an underground market below the radar of the governing authority.
Alternatively, should the City decide to go ahead with the conversion from
forbidden to encouraged, the rental charge for privately rented slips should be
equal to that charged small commercial marinas; the charge should be based
on total tidelands water space; the proposed pier permit should include verbiage
that requires private slip rental agreements to be reported to the City; and, there
should be penalties for any who do not report. Without these provisions, the City
would be gifting public funds while giving up important safeguards that are
required of commercial operations.
Thank you for listening.
Respectfully,
Jim Parker
Port Calypso Marina
Brown, Leilani
From: Torres, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:17 PM
To: Harp, Aaron; Brown, Leilani
Subject: FW: Question on property taxes --
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:10 PM
To: 'Jeff @newportsecurities.com'
Cc: Torres, Michael
Subject: RE: Question on property taxes --
Dear Mr. Kilpatrick—
Thanks for your e-mail. I appreciate it. Please know that this is a hard issue for all of us to deal with — we all dislike it.
If you have property right that extends into the water, or have some ownership of the land beneath the water, that's
something we would look at now or as we develop your permit (potentially a minimal fee permit versus one that
charges rent). I stated in the workshop yesterday that the City cannot, should not, and will not charge rent for
something we don't own.
If you would like to pass along any specific information /paperwork to us, please do so. Assistant City Attorney Michael
Torres (cc -d here) will likely help us look at that.
Thanks again for your e-mail and I hope you have a good Thanksgiving.
Dave
From: Jeffrey Kilpatrick [ mailto :Jeff(olnewoortsecurities.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:28 AM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: Question on property taxes --
City Manager
Mr. Dave Kiff
From: Jeffrey Kilpatrick- phone 951- 704 -4111
Hi Dave,
I read the story in the paper on the dock tax issue.
I have talked to the fellow on the island that is in opposition to the proposed "fee" on private docks—
Here is what I don't understand—
My family owns a home at 217 E. Edgewater Ave. —and has since the 1960's - --
We own two parcels at that address—one parcel for the land under the home and one for the land under our pier and
the deed covers the land under the pier out past the end of the pier.
We have been paying property taxes on both these parcels for all these decades while I believe many of the other
private piers in the bay are built over tideland or land owned by the public.
These pier owners have not paid property taxes separately from their homes as we have been doing decade after
decade.
In fact —their piers are not much different than the moorings in the bay —both of which are over public land and both
are required to maintain their own boat docking equipment or pier— but the pier owners are not paying any fees for use
of the tidelands under their boats while the mooring leases come with monthly costs.
I was told back a year ago that piers like ours —that is built over land that we "own" and which we have a deed for and
which we pay property taxes on every single year would not be subject to this new proposed private pier fee that is
under discussion.
In fact —I'm not sure why we are being assessed the current $100 or so yearly fee on piers as again our pier is built over
land we own and which we pay property taxes on every year. The property tax also assesses the value of the pier
structure as well.
I look forward to your thoughts on this question for owners of piers built over privately owned and deeded land.
Best Regards,
Jeff Kilpatrick
Brown, Leilani
From:
Harp, Aaron
Sent:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 8:01 AM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Cc:
Torres, Michael
Subject:
FW: JC Comments For Private Pier Meeting
Attachments:
Questions.pdf
From: John Corrough fmailto:icorrough(aaol.com]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 12:39 PM
To: Kiff, Dave
Subject: IC Comments For Private Pier Meeting
Dave: Here is an early copy of comments I will make /submit at today's workshop on Private Piers. Nothing new or
earthshaking from what has been discussed before, except for #4 which CNB needs to take a good look at. Like the
commercial guys, no everybody out here with a pier is a millionaire in cash terms and while paying one's fair share is
appropriate, I think we all need to acknowledge that we are now paying for the past NB CC and staff "sleeping in the sun"
with regard to the Harbor. One of my first questions to Norma Glover 16 years ago was "what is all this controversy about
Tidelands, and why do we only pay $65 /year for a pier permit? I was advised by others in the room to keep quiet ..... and
learn.
John Corrough
Questions- Proposed CNB Tidelands Process /Rents For Residential Piers
City Hall Meeting/Workshop November 19, 2012
I am speaking on behalf of the Mary Fortner Corrough Trust, owner and
permittee of he 1004 South Bayfront portion of the pier and dock location
shared with neighbors at 1002 South Bayfront on Balboa Island for over 80 years.
We have four questions and related observations applicable to private piers
harbor -wide which we believe the City of Newport Beach should answer:
1. Can private residential docks be given the same permit option as the
commercial docks, as an alternative to a lease, including a flat fee as
currently and historically done, rather than a psf lease rate?
2. How will the City determine the actual owner /lessee /permittee
tidelands water and dock /pier areas located over an intensively -used
intertidal public beach and hand - launch watercraft /shore moorings
area like that surrounding Balboa Island ? Pier owner /TL
lessee / permittee use of the floating dock and pier as well as public beach
access are limited by beach slope and tidal levels affecting navigability,
beach access and launch on a significant portion of the Balboa Island
Bulkhead to Pierhead Tidelands area, and elsewhere in similar situations.
3. How will the City proportionately divide the Tidelands Areas and rents
for two adjacent properties with a shared pier? Our pier, dock and water
areas are symmetrically divided on each side of a shared property line
extending down the centerline of the shared pier. Others are asymmetrical
or have other complications which will require many unique harbor
solutions for City staff to legally document, calculate and track.
4. What would be the lease start rate and assumed ramp -up period of 5+
years to a target rate and year and are the City -cited $0.50/$0.55 psf
hypothetical rates proposed start rates or target rates? A careful review
of the residential portions of the two appraisals prepared for the City
indicates that the 2011 SLC Southern California Benchmark Rent Rate for
their average private pier example was $0.33 which, inflated to
2012 ,would be approximately $0.34. We have noted with interest the
retiree budgets through decades -past negligent City harbor management.
John & Mary Corrough ,1004 South Bayfront, Newport Beach, CA 92662
Brown, Leilani
From:
Harp, Aaron
Sent:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 8:02 AM
To:
Brown, Leilani
Cc:
Torres, Michael
Subject:
FW: After attending the workshop on Dock Tax/Fees /Rents I now realize what the rush is and
why it being called Rent.
For public record.
From: Harp, Aaron
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 7:44 AM
To: 'emmettconrecode @gmail.com'
Cc: Dept - City Council; Kiff, Dave; Torres, Michael
Subject: RE: After attending the workshop on Dock Tax /Fees /Rents I now realize what the rush is and why it being
called Rent.
Good Morning Mr. Conrecode,
The City Council has forwarded your email to me for response. A public entity, like the state and City, may not lose title
to or any interest in property through adverse possession. (See, Civil Code Section 1007.) Please let me know if you have
any questions. Thank you.
Aaron C. Harp
City Attorney
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA, 92658
Phone: (949) 644 -3131
Fax: (949) 644-3139
Email: aharp @newportbeachca.aov
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information in this e-mail message is intended for the, confidential use of the addressees only.
The information is subject to the attorney - client privilege and /or may be attorney work - product. Recipients should not file
copies of this e-mail with publicly accessible records. If you are not an addressee or an authorized agent responsible for
delivering this e-mail to a designated addressee, you have received this e-mail in error, and any further review, dissemination
distribution, copying or forwarding of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Moreover, such inadvertent disclosure shall not
compromise or waive the attorney - client privilege as to this communication. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify
us immediately at (949) 644 -3131. Thank you.
From: Emmett Conrecode <emmettconrecode(u)a , em ail. com>
Date: November 20, 2012 1:57:02 AM PST
To: < CityCouncil (cdnewportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Doug Iler <dilcr c,ilerlawtnoup.com>
Subject: After attending the workshop on Dock Tax/Fees /Rents I now realize what the rush
is and why it being called Rent.
"Evidence that a squatter paid rent to the owner would defeat adverse possession for that period."
http: / /en.wikipedia.org/wiki /Adverse possession
The City and State have never maintained the wet lands Adjacent property owners with docks
assumed that responsibility. Maintained and continuously possessed those lands. Under
California Law we have Adverse Possession Ownership Rights aka Squatters Rights. Therefore
no rents are due to the city or state, but once we pay "Rent" we lose those ownership rights.
Please advise me where I'm wrong in my legal theory. As a Landlord I know. Charging a
simple fee (dock fee) does not maintain property rights unless the property is maintained and
rights and responsibilities of that land are exercised. Neither the State or City have ever met
those responsibility of the Tidal Zones of Newport Beach, therefor I believe the property rights
belong to those that have possessed and maintained those lands.
Thanks in advance,
Emmett Conrecode
Brown, Leilani
From: Linda Klein [Ikleinl4 @me.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 4:50 PM
To: Kiff, Dave
Cc: Curry, Keith; Daigle, Leslie; Nancy Gardner; Hill, Rush; Michael Henn; Rosansky, Steven; Kiff, Dave;
Selich, Edward; Brown, Leilani
Subject: Totally Unacceptable!
Dear City Leaders and Staff Members,
As a business person involved in real estate in the past, I have seen what it takes to create a full range of attractive
opportunities and choices when launching a development project.
The effort and outreach is simply not being made by Newport Beach to produce a powerful array of options for an upscale
hotel on the city hall site. Where is your passion for the success and potential of this amazing city?
You are failing to do the job you have promised to do. Let's stop the foot dragging and get moving to produce quality
options that will create a permanent and beautiful legacy for the Peninsula area of Newport Beach. There is no excuse for
producing anything less than a spectacular result in this city that is known around the world as extraordinary. The bay and
beaches are the priceless and powerful essence of Newport. Your lackluster effort is squandering this pivotal time in the
future of the Peninsula.
I look forward to hearing the results of a quality effort to attract an outstanding developer for this crucial project
Linda Klein