HomeMy WebLinkAbout20 - Establish a Trial Anchorage Area West of Lido Isle - Harbor Commission Recommendation - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed
July 14, 2015
Mulvey, Jennifer Item No. 20
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 9:20 AM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Temporary boat anchorage
Attachments: 7-12-15 Letter Anchorage.docx
For the record.
-----Original Message -----
From: Pamela Whitesides [mailto:ptlaw@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 8:13 AM
To: Kiff, Dave; Miller, Chris
Subject: Temporary boat anchorage
FYI: Attached is a letter I sent to the Council. Thanks, Pam Whitesides
Dear Mayor and City Council:
The Harbor Commission has recommended another "trial" visiting boat anchorage in the
turning basin at the west end of Lido Isle, with one of the major rationales being that we
need to be more welcoming to visitors who might spend money in the local businesses.
The fact is we already had a visiting boat anchorage there during the dredging of the bay
several years ago, which was also supposed to be a "trial' to see how it worked. The
result of the trial was that the anchorage was out -of -control and detrimental to the
residents' quality of life. even according to one Harbor Commissioner who wants to try it
again.
History of the Last Trial Anchorage at the West End of Lido
Vacationing boaters can be a rowdy bunch, which I say without judgment as I spent over
25 years vacationing on my own boat. I've been there and done that, however, we were
never anchored in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Of course, some boaters will
be relatively quiet, but some will bring as much of the party -town mindset, often fueled
by alcohol, that visitors for years have brought with them to vacation rentals, bars, and
restaurants further down on the peninsula.
Last time the anchorage was tried, there were giant raft ups on some weekends with as
many as 17 boats. There were live bands in the middle of the turning basin and no one
seemed to know whether or how they were permitted. Much worse, however, was the
daily noise of amplified music coming from multiple individual boats at the same time,
their different music snaking a cacophony of noise that made sitting out on my own patio
impossible. That "music" combined with the inevitable yelling and noise of a loud party
right outside my windows made the inside of my home, windows closed, my only refuge.
There were also safety issues. The bottom of the turning basin apparently doesn't hold
anchors well, especially if a boater is inexperienced in anchoring. In the last trial
anchorage, boats would continually slip their anchors and slide outside the boundaries of
the anchorage. In some cases unmanned boats even floated free of their anchors and ran
into surrounding docks while their owners were ashore.
During the last trial anchorage, there was virtually no enforcement or supervision of
activities in the turning basin. Phone calls to the Harbor Patrol usually meant waiting an
hour for the Patrol to arrive, if it ever came at all. With apparently limited resources, a
noise complaint or anchorage boundary issue just didn't demand a quick response, or
sometimes any response at all from a Harbor Patrol boat that might be at the other end of
the harbor. Even if we called the Harbor Patrol, for example about the huge raft ups and
live bands, we were told to contact "the City" because apparently they knew nothing
about it. Calling the City on a Monday after a wild weekend obviously is no solution.
Dedicated Monitoring and Enforcement Are Essential:
If the Council insists on another "trial" after the disruption caused the last time,
enforcement and supervision are key to making it at least somewhat tolerable for the
people living and working around the anchorage. We need a full time Harbor Patrol boat
or some kind of City enforcement boat at this end of the harbor, and we need to know
who to call if enforcement isn't being done. At the hearing, the Harbor Commission was
of course all in favor of rigorous enforcement and even asked the representative of the
Harbor Patrol to weigh in on the issue. He assured the Commission that people just have
to call the Harbor Patrol if there's a problem. That promise just doesn't fly based on the
last time and the reality of the Patrol's ability or incentive to patrol the turning basin or be
on hand with a complaint. Even now the Harbor Patrol can't keep people from jumping
off the Lido Bridge, which happens virtually every summer day, several times a day.
For the residents, noise is the biggest quality of life issue. The portion of the turning
basin proposed for the anchorage is nearest the residents. That arca is horseshoe shaped
and therefore the sound bounces and is amplified on three sides by the land, unlike the
more open anchorage at the east end of Lido Isle. The Harbor Commission has proposed
prohibiting boat raft ups in the anchorage, but amplified music from individual boats will
apparently still be allowed when it should be prohibited. Since the City prohibits
amplified music on the commercial party boats, and long ago prohibited restaurants along
PCH from opening their windows to prevent amplified music travelling across the water
to the residents, there is no reason to make an exception for amplified music coming from
individual boats or groups of boats that are located far closer to the homes than the
restaurants and party boats. Moreover, the City would not allow loud amplified music on
land coming from a party in a residential neighborhood and it shouldn't be acceptable on
the water either.
Another reason a dedicated Harbor Patrol boat needs to be assigned to the turning basin is
to supervise the many activities the Council has approved in the same body of water. In
addition to private and rental boats traversing to and from their slips, sailboat races and
lessons, summer campers, rowing clubs, SUPers, kayakers, water bicyclers, floating
fishermen, and swimmers use the sante part of the bay. Add jetpacks weaving around the
whole area, the large commercial party boats cruising through, and squeeze in the
Invictus for its regular visits, and it promises to be quite a summer.
Pollution and Water Safety:
This part of the bay doesn't flush as well as the bay closer to the open ocean and will get
worse with discharges from the anchorage. The City should institute a requirement for
dye tablets in the holding tanks of the anchored boats, as they do in Avalon. The small
beach at the west end of Lido Isle is used for swimming by summer campers and other
beach goers, and will be used by the visiting boaters as well. The pollution levels need to
be continuously monitored to ensure the water along the beach and in the turning basin is
safe for swimmers and other harbor users.
The Council's Policies Favorina Visitors
This Council's desire to bring ever more visitors to the turning basin is not without costs
and its decisions decide who the winners and losers are. It's not too hard to tell where the
residents fit in with the Council if it approves this anchorage. With the jctpacks still
roaring in front of my house, the giant Invictus sometimes parked at an angle like a three
or four-story building 60 -feet wide in front of my 42 -foot lot, its lights illuminating my
living room all night, and now this "temporary' giant boat party in front of me, the City
really will have done a number on the beautiful bay, my own and my tenants' quality of
life, the income I depend on, and the property values of real estate I have owned for 25
years. What was once a quality neighborhood is declining and becoming somewhere that
isn't such a good place to live.
The Council's recent decisions have obviously changed the environment in and around
the bay and this anchorage proposes to change it significantly more. While it may not
have been required for this short tern trial, should the Council determine it should
become a permanent anchorage or permanently periodic, an Environmental Impact
Report should be a required first step to evaluate whether to allow it. Under CEQA, there
are sufficient fair and valid arguments that the anchorage will have a substantial impact
on the environment, including a negative impact on the views and beautiful vistas of the
bay and on the residents' right to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of the lessons learned from the last trial
anchorage, namely, that it doesn't work in this residential neighborhood. If you are
nevertheless determined to try the anchorage again, please take the steps necessary to
monitor the turning basin and enforce reasonable regulations to control the activities and
noise in the turning basin.
Sincerely,
Pam Whitesides
3328, 3312, 3314, 3316, 3318 Via Lido
Received After Agenda Printed
July 14, 2015
Item No. 20
From:
City Clerk's Office
Sent:
Tuesday, July 14, 2015 11:26 AM
To:
McDonald, Cristal; Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim
Subject:
FW: Proposed temporary anchorage
Attachments:
Existing Anchorage.pdf
From: Kiff, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 11:25:42 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Proposed temporary anchorage
For the record.
From: Don & Judy Cole [ma ilto:laclunahouse(c)me com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Selich, Edward; Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Curry, Keith; Duffield, Duffy; Peotter, Scott; Muldoon, Kevin
Cc: Kiff, Dave; Miller, Chris
Subject: Proposed temporary anchorage
Dear Mayor and City Council, _
We request that you do not adopt a resolution authorizing the establishment of a temporary trial anchorage in the Newport Harbor
Turning Basin without addressing the following issues.
1. The proposed anchorage area is too large and too close to existing vessels and homes. Attachment B- Harbor Commission
Recommended Anchorage Configuration is based upon an existing Anchorage Footprint of 5.25 acres that was taken from an aerial in
early to mid 2014. The actual configuration of the existing anchorage (verified by GPS coordinates and charted on a Raymarine chart
plotter last week) is attached and calculates to approximately 4 acres. In the existing anchorage the boundary buoys are approximately
370' away from any vessels berthed along the shore, but yet the recommendation for the trial is that the boundaries in the test could be
as close as 200'. Further, based upon the scale of the Final Recommendation Footprint, the boundaries shown are under 200' away
from berthed vessels in more than one area. Why would the test area need to be larger and closer to homes than the existing
anchorage?
2. What factual data or documentation exists that supports the feeling that the existing anchorage is "heavily used and at times, can
become overcrowded". Our observation is that, with the exception 4th of July and maybe Labor Day, it is rarely occupied to overflow
capacity. Just this weekend (early Sat. AM and mid day Sunday) in the middle of summer, there were only 4 & 3 vessels respectively.
If the existing anchorage is supposed to be 5.25 acres, then maybe this contributed to the perception that it was overcrowded and
maybe the boundaries need to be re -adjusted.
3. Promised active management of the temporary anchorage area by the Harbor Patrol to address resident's concerns regarding
increased noise and unchecked party -like behavior is not realistic. The previous trial was a mess.
4. Our end of the harbor and the harbor in general is getting more crowded all the time. Do we really need to fill in every available
open space? There is a conflict of use with the recently approved area for water propelled vessels as well as the approved mooring of
the htvictus. In addition, there are private and rental boats traversing to their slips, large party boats, the Windward Sailing Club,
summer sailing programs, Boy Scout programs, OC Crew, rowing clubs, SUPers, kayakers, fishermen and swimmers off the Lido
bridge beach.
5. The argument that with the potential, future addition of a public dock at Central Avenue, anchoring boaters could have much better
access to the land -side amenities in the Lido Marina Village area than is currently available at the existing anchorage location is
flawed. Isn't there going to be a public dock and 23 new slips at the new Marina Park development near the existing anchorage?
6. It is also argued that the existing anchorage could be closed during special event regattas providing an open channel for the racers to
use as well as for land -side spectators to enjoy an unobstructed view if a proposed anchorage at the west end of Lido is established.
What about our unobstructed view and what about the summer beer can racers who use "Z" mark and the turning basin 3 to A nights a
week?
7. The Harbor Commission's goal is to test the concept for 2.5 months during the busier summer boating season. This is late in the
game for a true test.
8. The May 22, 2015 public notice of the Harbor Commission's consideration of this proposal did not adequately cover the affected
area. While we did receive this notice, we did not receive the June 19, 2015 notice. How many affected owners, residents or
businesses are not aware of this proposal?
Thank you for you consideration,
Don & Judy Cole
Owners- 3326 Via Lido