Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 - Establish a Trial Anchorage Area West of Lido Isle — Harbor Commission Recommendation - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed May 24, 2016 Item No. 6 From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:02 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Temporary Anchorage From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:01:47 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Temporary Anchorage -----Original Message ----- From: Pamela Whitesides [mailto:ptlaw@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 4:50 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Temporary Anchorage Dear Mayor Dixon and City Council Members, I am unable to attend the Council meeting Tuesday when you will decide whether to approve another "temporary" anchorage in the turning basin. Instead, I hope you will consider the issues I raise below and decide not to impose another temporary anchorage on the bay. In past Council decisions, the concerns of affected harbor users and the residents on Via Lido and Lido Isle haven't seemed to matter to the Council in the end. It seems the City's pursuit of more and more visitors to feed the businesses justifies the Council's decisions, no matter how the decisions affect the bay or how the activities affect the surrounding residents' right to the quiet enjoyment of their homes. Before approving another temporary anchorage in order to make it permanent, I urge the Council to contemplate the enormous changes the City has already approved in the turning basin, and consider the possibility our residential neighborhood may have already been asked to accommodate the interests of visitors and businesses more than enough. THE TURNING BASIN BEFORE ALL THE CHANGES I have lived and owned rental property facing the turning basin for close to 25 years, so I can speak for the residents in at least five homes (and probably many more) whose quality of life is impacted by activities in the turning basin. Over the years the residents on Via Lido and Lido Isle have willingly or even gladly accommodated crowds of visitors and parking problems during the Christmas Boat Parade, the Boat Show twice a year, and the wedding and party boats. Even though there are negative aspects from the crowds and cars, at least the major effects were confined to the street side of the homes. The residents could still enjoy the peaceful bay in our "front yards", and the residents and visitors alike could gaze over the expanse of open water and watch the abundant wild birds, including scores of pelicans, kingfishers, heron, and sea gulls that used to circle and fish here. In the past, there were always mullet jumping in the bay, an occasional seal and even a few bait balls rolling through the turning basin. In short, the turning basin was almost a nature preserve and as close to experiencing sea life as many visitors will ever get. Through most of the years I've lived here, the City Councils protected the quality of life of the citizens and residents of Newport Beach, even when sometimes in opposition to the interests of business or developers. For example, when residents objected to noise coming from restaurants across the bay, restaurants were required to keep their windows closed to contain the noise. There was also almost a reverence for the beauty of the turning basin and concern for the wildlife as public resources to be protected, concerns that have somehow disappeared in recent years. The prior and current Council's recent decisions seem to have the primary goal of maximizing the number of visitors to the area, including making the harbor "more welcoming" to visiting boaters, all with the ultimate aim of increasing business revenue on shore. As a consequence activities in the turning basin have dramatically increased in the last five years or so, to the point that seeing a single pelican in the turning basin is unique enough to merit an excited comment, most of the other birds are rare or virtually gone, as are the mullet and bait fish. THE CITY'S POLICY IN FAVOR OF VISITORS AND BUSINESSES Over time it has become obvious that attracting visitors to the harbor is a "no matter what" goal, and visitors and business interests trump any negative consequences to the turning basin itself and trump residents' concern for their quality of life. First came the "temporary" anchorage that became a disaster when the turning basin was full of boats and completely out of control. Establishing the anchorage that summer was unavoidable during the dredging of the harbor, but it proved to be a nightmare for the residents. There was virtually no enforcement of any noise or boundary rules, even when we called to report problems. Even back then there were suggestions the City wanted to see how an anchorage in the turning basin would work long term but after it was over, we hoped that horrible experience would prove to be the end of an anchorage next to the homes. Sometime later the jet packs suddenly showed up in the turning basin and roared for months next to our homes. Windows had to be shut and the jet packs huge wakes tossed the boats around in their slips. Finally, someone decided maybe the Harbor Commission should investigate whether jet packs were suitable in the harbor. After careful study of the issues, including input from other harbor users and residents, the Harbor Commission recommended that jet packs be prohibited in the harbor. Residents worked hard on a petition signed by other neighborhood residents, citizens of Newport Beach, and business owners asking the Council to ban jet packs from the harbor. The citizens and businesses most harmed by jet packs were just no match for the Council majority's eagerness to please Jet Pack America and its customers. Although jet packs were acknowledged to be dangerous, noisy and a nuisance to those on the shore, the Council's decision in favor of them was justified in part that the novelty of the jet packs would attract more visitors and their money to the area's businesses. That Council decision was a personal wake up call for me, showing just how little importance the Council gave to the interests of the City's citizens, residents and harbor users most affected and endangered by the jet packs. Shortly after the jet packs showed up, the Harbor Commission decided to recommend another "temporary" anchorage to gauge the need for it and see whether it could be successfully managed to avoid a repeat of the chaos in the former temporary anchorage. Last summer's anchorage worked out pretty well for the residents, mainly because there was little demand for it and hence very few boats, and especially because the anchorage area was farther away from the homes on Via Lido. Consistent with what happened in the prior temporary anchorage, there was virtually no enforcement in terms of patrol boats monitoring the area, however, the lack of boats meant there wasn't much need for enforcement. The time I did call the Harbor Patrol about a five -boat raft up, no one ever came to take care of it and the boats remained all day. At about the same time the idea of last summer's temporary anchorage came up, the Invictus arrived. Press reports were that it was coming into the harbor for the special purpose of a christening ceremony. Unfortunately, it keeps coming back to hang out in front of my windows, creating a situation in front of my home (and my neighbors) that would never be tolerated anyplace else in the City. The Invictus is assigned to drop its bow anchor directly in front of my second story living room windows. During the day, my 30 -foot -wide windows are almost completely blocked by Invictus' 38 -foot beam. Even worse, for days at a time, the inside of my house is flooded with lights on the boat's three or four-story bow so that I am lighted up all night inside my house and my kitchen, living and dining rooms are never dark. Although I asked for some relief from the nighttime lights, Commissioner Avery stated that the Invictus cannot turn the lights down further than they are. The message is that when it comes to accommodating the Invictus, even if its location in the turning basin creates an obvious nuisance, the residents' right to the quiet enjoyment of their homes just 2 doesn't matter. Instead, because the Invictus is so huge and such a symbol of wealth, it's "fun" for visitors to see it and a real coup to have a boat of that caliber in the harbor, regardless of any rights of the residents. Now there's another proposal for a "temporary anchorage" in a second attempt to establish there is a need for it. It's pretty clear by now that it's really about bringing more visitors to spend their money and increase business revenues on shore. By advertising the anchorage to attract more boats, the goal is to fill it with as many boats as will fit, prove the anchorage is "necessary," and make it permanent. Whether it harms the residents is almost beside the point as is whether it harms the turning basin itself. As a result of all the increased activities the wild birds and fish have essentially been driven away and there is no reason to believe the activities' effects have been any better under the surface. GIVEN THAT THE "TEMPORARY" ANCHORAGE IS COMING, PLEASE HAVE A PLAN FOR ENFORCEMENT During the discussions at the Harbor Commission, I haven't heard any new plans to monitor the next temporary anchorage. If more and more boats fill the anchorage, as is the goal, a repeat of the chaos during the first anchorage is almost inevitable unless the anchorage is monitored. While the Harbor Patrol always expresses the willingness to enforce the rules in the anchorage, every time it's put to the test, the Harbor Patrol has shown it doesn't have the ability or personnel to monitor the anchorage or enforce the rules. The fact is that patrol boats in the turning basin are almost as rare as pelicans. Suggesting the Harbor Patrol will continue to enforce the law in the harbor while also enforcing anchorage rules is really a feel -good hope rather than an enforcement plan. Calls to the Harbor Patrol about noise or boundary issues in the anchorage will and should not take priority over law enforcement. Furthermore, expecting the residents to act as some sort of community sheriffs and call the Harbor Patrol to report problems is an intrusion on whatever time residents have to enjoy their homes, and the intrusion is compounded by resentment when the Harbor Patrol doesn't respond. The bottom line is the residents shouldn't have to monitor a bad situation the City has created and abandoned in front of their homes. Avalon in Catalina has been mentioned as an example of a crowded anchorage that works. I've spent many weeks moored in Avalon Harbor in my years of boating. Avalon has a Harbor Master in charge of small one-person harbor boats that monitor the harbor almost full time, at least until very late at night after the harbor quiets down. The Harbor Master boats also put dye tablets in the holding tanks of the boats to monitor and minimize pollution in the bay. If the City insists on having an anchorage in the turning basin, it should provide a Harbor Master -type boat specifically to monitor the turning basin anchorage and the other anchorage if needed, possibly funded by the boaters who anchor in the harbor for more than a day. With a dedicated harbor boat, the City could also put dye tablets in the boats' holding tanks to discourage pollution and protect children playing in the water off the beach and other swimmers. I am discouraged by how impotent the residents seem to be in protecting the beautiful environment we have been privileged to live in for all these years. The goal of welcoming as many visiting boaters as there is open water with the hope it will increase revenue for businesses on shore shouldn't be achieved by sacrificing the health of the turning basin itself, the needs of the other harbor users, or the residents' quiet enjoyment of their homes. I hate to see the turning basin turned into part Coney Island attractions and part RV park, but while I hate it for my own home environment, I hate it even more for the loss to future generations of the simple pleasure of looking at open water, seeing the birds soar and the fish jump, and dreaming of someday living here. That loss is priceless. With respect for the work you do, Pam Whitesides 3