Dana Point Marina Slip/Shipyard Reduction - Help Needed!

[dvideohd]

There is an article in the OC Register....

Dana Point Harbor revamp plan heads to Coastal Commission | harbor, coastal, commission, slips, boaters - News - OCRegister.com

It is a combination of problems - reduced boatyard space (so... where DO you perform your bottom painting??)

Reduced slips - there will be a significant reduction - AT LEAST 400 slips according to the Calif. Coastal Commission. In addition, there will be severe depletion of some "slip sizes"... Those folks won't have anywhere to go, or at least from what I can see... the "we won't boot" anyone out strategy has a lot of wiggle room...

On the slip size waiting list... with the economic downturn, slip space for sub 28 boats is very low... for long boats - that tie up at the dock ends - it is NEARLY INFINITE.. I would sure like to see that addressed.. but the slip space increase doesn't do it... Wait times of 15+ years are NUTS for your "NEW 65' Macgregors"... :>

I personally don't see what the problem is in simply expanding the slip space to accommodate larger size boats.. I have never seen any real analysis on that point.

I do see, from the article, that there will be 153,000 square feet of new retail/commercial space.

--jerry

[poopdeckpappy]

I read the DPHR proposal and Calif Coastal Commissons recommedations and it appear that the current proposal does not meet several Coastal Acts

Section 30213 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.

Section 30220 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational activities that cannot readily be provided at inland areas shall be protected for such use.

Section 30221 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use and development unless present and foreseeable demand for public or commercial recreational activities that could be accommodated on the property is already adequately provided for in the area

.

Section 30223 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that upland areas necessary to support coastal recreational uses shall be reserved for such uses, where feasible.

Section 30224 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that increased
recreational boating use of coastal waters shall be encouraged and that nonwater- dependent land uses shall be limited.

Section 30234 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that facilities that serve commercial fishing and recreational boating industries shall be protected and, where feasible,upgraded.

Section 30255 of the Coastal Act states, in part, that coastal dependent
development shall have priority over other developments on or near the shoreline. Coastal-Dependent/Related Development has priority
over other development near the shoreline as stated in the Coastal Act.

In addition, the Coastal Act states that lower cost visitor and recreational
facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided and
also recreational boating uses shall be encouraged and non-water
dependent uses shall be limited.

Therefore, the submitted Dana Point Harbor Revitalization Plan is inconsistent with Sections 30213, 30220, 30221, 30223, 30224,30234, and 30255 of the Coastal Act because it fails to provide policies that would protect Coastal-Dependent/Related Development.

Therefore, the LUP Amendment must be denied as submitted.

Also you comment on the need to go north to Newport for repairs ??, Bellport Marine in Newport is 27,000 sf, Basin Marine in Newport is 28,000 sf, Dana Point shipyard is 52,000 plus sf so I don't get this platform you're using

[dvideohd]

Dana Point Shipyard may be reduced in size "by 1 acre for a "plaza""...

Your numbers - if you subtract 1 acre is 52,000 sf current - minus the 43,560 sf (per acre)....

So I think in effect you "lose" the shipyard, for all practical purposes... Perhaps there is "some plan" for keeping a part of the shipyard.. but I don't see it - or know anyone who does...
Most small businesses have a tough time getting by.. reduce the shipyard "that much" - and I would think it would be almost impossible... Take any restruant - eliminate the seating and table space... - leave the rest rooms.. and let's see them make a go of it... TOUGH!!!!

So I consider that the result would be:

-- The "shipyard" area "left" would be almost impossible to do work in - certainly for larger boats....

-- routine maintenance - like bottom painting and the like - would have to be done far away... As a piratical (practical?) matter, I would think that the AVERAGE BOAT would find it MUCH HARDER to do the necessary things to keep them in good shape... So you are GOING TO FIND more "run down boats"....

-- as an exercise in math... consider that the boats in slips will be going to Newport (or further) for bottom work and repairs at least every couple of years... I calculated that HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of GALLONS of fuel would be burned in doing this... It's a math exercise...

-- some boats - with critical maintaince - might have to make that long, offshore haul. This IS A SAFETY ISSUE... Example: Rigging or mast corrosion issues? Go to Newport and get hauled... Note that this is just my example.. there are others, I guess...

************

Poopdeckpappy...

I think you hit the nail on the head... But TOMMORROW - there will be a hearing and I think it matters if boaters send an email registering (a) a protest against the current plant and (b) thier opinion...

--jerry

BTW... My 28' Columbia MKII is a bit older than your '78... but it's Classic Plastic... and I would like to keep it as long as I sail... So it will need yard space - and I will buy supplies from HARBOR MERCHANTS... I think you might be doing th same thing. Move the 'yard... and most folks will buy supplies LOCAL to the 'yard.... not good for Dana Point Merchants...

*****************

So please - send an EMAIL and/or FAX tonight - or in the morning... --thanks...

******************

--jerry

[poopdeckpappy]

Jerry, don't get me wrong, I'm on your side and it looks as though the Coastal Commission is as well but, I don't think the facts are getting stated correctly

Currently the shipyard is on a 113,000 sf lease area. However, the shipyard operator has historically used only 52,000 sf for shipyard operations with parking on another 0.4 acres. The remaining acre has been historically used for dry boat storage.

The County/City wants to reduce the shipyard land use area to 69,600 sf and has presented information indicating that 69,000 sf is adequate for a viable shipyard, even with a reconfigured marina with larger boats. The shipyard wants to retain the shipyard lease area at 113,200 sf, stating that the entire area is needed to maneuver and properly service the larger boats that will be moored in the Harbor under the proposed reconfiguration.

The LUP as modified would require the County/City to retain the shipyard land use designation on a minimum of 69,600 sf, but would allow for a larger facility since a shipyard is an allowable use under the MSC land use designation.

Also, back to the slip issue, my wife and I have walked or kayaked most every inch of that marina and I think you would agree that you'd be able to find a countless number of boats that either hasn't seen its owner in years, hasn't had the registration renewed in years and some that have no business being in the water let alone taking up slip space, I also think you'd agree that brokers and clubs seem to take up far more slip space than should be allowed, I think if those issues were addressed, the impact of the loss of slips would be minimal

[dvideohd]

In today's meeting, the whole "Plan" discussion was rescheduled to Ocean Side in October. So the shipyard issue is one item I will certainly learn more about the use definition of... From the comments made - I think that there were many confusing items in the plan - things that were not spelled out enough.. Hence, the reschedule to October..

I will certainly get more detail on the shipyard issue... (I do, after all - have a bottom job coming up on my boat...)...

If I am incorrect in my understanding, then I most certainly apologize as well.

Dana Point Harbor is a "big place" compared to a lot of places... I compare it to a number of places on the Texas Coast - and Dana really does show well....

I was a member of a Harbor Sailing Club for a while.. they had some boats in slips - for sure - these boats had been leased from boatowners. They were used to teach sailing - in multiple courses. The boats were also available to people to rent for short term use - depending on the sailor's skills... I think that was an OUTSTANDING way to multitask a slip - for hundreds of people to enjoy....

I also know that brokers had access to a number of slips as well.. I guess the merits on that can be discussed from different standpoints. I know that if you want to sell or buy a boat, then such an arrangement can be critical in the process. You know what the wait list has been like... something to bridge the "permanent" wait IS needed for temporary slip use.

Like you say, I want only to deal in the facts - and what I picked up in reading the LUP.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

the sailing club I was a member of had many hundreds of members... I had some great Friday/Saturday nights there - as well as friendships of fellow boaters... I think they serve an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT niche - as there are a LOT of interested boaters - with no slip or permanent boat... Lots of people learned sailing and navigation in the club... It certainly rankles that such "new" clubs could be prohibited..... and that might be another "unclear" spot in the LUP.......... It did NOT make any sense to me to ADD 150000+ square feet of retail - and yet prohibit new sailing/yacht clubs... which is one of the KEY ways for new folks to get into boating...

Clubs are something else to follow up on.........

I strive to be accurate in what I have posted - I do apologize if I am off base on something... However I certainly considered that to describe the plan as "Modernization" - or "Revitalization" was somewhat deceptive. The devil is in the details.

--jerry robinson

--jerry

[JiffyLube]

Originally Posted by dvideohd

In today's meeting, the whole "Plan" discussion was rescheduled to Ocean Side in October. So the shipyard issue is one item I will certainly learn more about the use definition of... From the comments made - I think that there were many confusing items in the plan - things that were not spelled out enough.. Hence, the reschedule to October..

I will certainly get more detail on the shipyard issue... (I do, after all - have a bottom job coming up on my boat...)...

If I am incorrect in my understanding, then I most certainly apologize as well.

Did you mean Oceanside, Ca.?

Is Dana Point a public or private marina?

QUOTE=dvideohd;495448] Dana Point Harbor is a "big place" compared to a lot of places... I compare it to a number of places on the Texas Coast - and Dana really does show well....

I was a member of a Harbor Sailing Club for a while.. they had some boats in slips - for sure - these boats had been leased from boatowners. They were used to teach sailing - in multiple courses. The boats were also available to people to rent for short term use - depending on the sailor's skills... I think that was an OUTSTANDING way to multitask a slip - for hundreds of people to enjoy....

I also know that brokers had access to a number of slips as well.. I guess the merits on that can be discussed from different standpoints. I know that if you want to sell or buy a boat, then such an arrangement can be critical in the process. You know what the wait list has been like... something to bridge the "permanent" wait IS needed for temporary slip use. [/QUOTE]

How long are waits on the waiting lists?

QUOTE=dvideohd;495448] Like you say, I want only to deal in the facts - and what I picked up in reading the LUP.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

the sailing club I was a member of had many hundreds of members... I had some great Friday/Saturday nights there - as well as friendships of fellow boaters... I think they serve an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT niche - as there are a LOT of interested boaters - with no slip or permanent boat... Lots of people learned sailing and navigation in the club... It certainly rankles that such "new" clubs could be prohibited..... and that might be another "unclear" spot in the LUP.......... It did NOT make any sense to me to ADD 150000+ square feet of retail - and yet prohibit new sailing/yacht clubs... which is one of the KEY ways for new folks to get into boating...

Clubs are something else to follow up on......... [/QUOTE]

While it is very convient for sailing clubs to center their meetings and classsroom sessions around a harbor, by not holding meetings or classroom sessions at a harbor in no way restricts the formations of sailing clubs.

QUOTE=dvideohd;495448] I strive to be accurate in what I have posted - I do apologize if I am off base on something... However I certainly considered that to describe the plan as "Modernization" - or "Revitalization" was somewhat deceptive. The devil is in the details.

--jerry robinson

--jerry [/QUOTE]

[poopdeckpappy]

Jerry, Thanks for your involvement and the heads up on the Oct meeting in Oceanside, if I can make it I'll go to show support, I don't want to see DP commercialised anymore than the next boater, but it is in desperate of some upgrading.

Jerry, I apologize that I came across as accusatory, that was not my intent

[dvideohd]

I think Marinas should be successful in business!!! That's how they stay in business and keep a good operation going!!! I just had some an issue with commercialization replacing boating!!!

There is certainly need of updating - but the harbor is in pretty good shape as is... So it is not critical - and there is time to do it right.

I appreciate your comments on the boatyard.. If the revitalization plan DOES NOT reduce or eliminate - then that should certainly be made clear.

Dana Point Harbor is publicly owned - and operated by a private management company. The management company ALSO manages other marinas.

--jerry

[JiffyLube]

Originally Posted by dvideohd

I think Marinas should be successful in business!!! That's how they stay in business and keep a good operation going!!! I just had some an issue with commercialization replacing boating!!!

There is certainly need of updating - but the harbor is in pretty good shape as is... So it is not critical - and there is time to do it right.

I appreciate your comments on the boatyard.. If the revitalization plan DOES NOT reduce or eliminate - then that should certainly be made clear.

Dana Point Harbor is publicly owned - and operated by a private management company. The management company ALSO manages other marinas.

--jerry

I find it interesting that Orange County or the City of Dana Point has farmed out the management of their harbor, when either one of them could be managing it themself. I know of several public harbors that are managed by the cities that they're in, but this is the first time I've heard of a California public harbor that is managed by the private sector. I guess I learned something.