Bill,
Interesting timing. I went down to my boat today to do some deferred maintainance and met two gentlemen who were walking and inspecting the Dana West docks. When I said hello and introduced myself I was told that the two men were from the County Harbor Department, one being the marina manager and the other, Greg Dean, is the Lease Compliance Officer. Dean advised me that he is largely responsible for overseeing the harbor rejuvination process. Since it was a hot day we talked at length about a number of issues regarding the marina plan including:
1. New larger slips. Current plans call for adding a limited number of larger to accomodate vessels in the 34'-38' range. While it has been reported that 90 larger slips will be created ---presumably by eliminating a number of existing small boat slips ---the '90' number is inaccurate. The exact number of larger slips has not been decided, however it is likely to be in the 30-50 range.
I then asked how existing marina occupants would be treated during the slip upgrade and restructuring. First, Dean went out of hiw way to reassure me that current rentors would not be displaced as a result of marina "upsizing".
The plan is this: 30+ slips turnover each month. By not filling these vacancies for a 90 day period, the marina will have an adequate inventory of slips to handle boats temporarily displaced as a result the installation of new docks and the elimination of a number of smaller slips caused by upsizing. Obviously since all the docks will eventually be replaced, just about every boat will be temporarily relocated.
IMO, this seems to be a reasonable solution, provided the county sticks to the plan.
2. Dry Storage. I expressed my observation that keeping the ramp and parking area adquate for the trailer boater was of equal importance. Clearly, the dry storage issue has become very "NIMBYesque". Dean agreed. With the recent rejection of the stack storage proposal based upon "blocked views" I went down to the proposed sight and took a look myself. Hell, some of the trees are higher than the proposed dry storage area and for the life of me I can't see where any view will be jeopardized.
Dean said that he was still hopeful that the stacked storage proposal is not dead. He was well aware that there are ~75,000 boat owners in the LA/OC area each of whom faces a storage issue. The issue remains open; hopefully, some of the ~25,000 boat owners in OC
will voice an opinion on this issue.
3. Rejuvination Funding and Slip Rates. The Harbor is self-funded. That is, the slip rentors and other lease holders pay for all the harbor upkeep including the slip rejuvination, including normal inflationary costs. I asked if the Harbor received any portion of my personal property tax that I paid each year on my boat. The short answer was NO. I expressed concern that I felt that that the average boat was reasonably satisified with the Harbor the way it is. The cost benefit was difficult to see if the rents were going to jump by any substantial amounts (>5%). I was told that while normal inflationary pressures required some form of increase, that the exact amount had not been decided upon.
Clearly, with self funding, improvments in the harbor are likely to result in some increase the monthly slip rents. How much, remains to be seen. IMO the best and only way to address this issue is to GET INVOLVED. GO TO THE INPUT MEETINGS. Dean was repeatedly told me that the design process is very much open and that input was still being sought and the plans were being changed as a result.
I was also told that the Harbor Department is aware that Dana is primarly a small boat harbor that fills a financial need that cannot be met in Newport. Their mandate was to keep it that way.
In retrospect, I feel that Dean's comments were sincere. He wants our input and does not want to loose the Dana Point "charm" by pricing Joe Boater out the market. Time will tell.
Hope this helps.
John
"Pescador"
BlackWatch 31'
