HomeMy WebLinkAboutHarbor Commission Agenda - 02-14-2018CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HARBOR COMMISSION AGENDA
Wednesday, February 14, 2018 - 6:30 PM
Harbor Commission Members:
William Kenney, Jr., Chair
David Girling, Vice Chair
Scott Cunningham, Secretary
Ira Beer, Commissioner
Paul Blank, Commissioner
John Drayton, Commissioner
Duncan McIntosh, Commissioner
Staff Members:
Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager
Dennis Durgan, Harbormaster
Carol Jacobs, Assistant City Manager
Ann Ewing, Deputy City Attorney
Raymund Reyes, Management Specialist
The Harbor Commission meeting is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that
the Harbor Commission agenda be posted at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that
the public be allowed to comment on agenda items before the Commission and items not on the agenda but are within
the subject matter jurisdiction of the Harbor Commission. The Chair may limit public comments to a reasonable amount
of time, generally three (3) minutes per person.
The City of Newport Beach’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an
attendee or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, we will
attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. Please contact Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager, at
least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation
is feasible at (949) 644-3034 or cmiller@newportbeachca.gov.
NOTICE REGARDING PRESENTATIONS REQUIRING USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT
Any presentation requiring the use of the City of Newport Beach’s equipment must be submitted to the Harbor
Resources Division 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
1)CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2)ROLL CALL
3)PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4)PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comments are invited on agenda and non-agenda items generally considered to be
within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission. Speakers must limit comments to
three (3) minutes. Before speaking, we invite, but do not require, you to state your name for the
record. The Commission has the discretion to extend or shorten the speakers’ time limit on
agenda or non-agenda items, provided the time limit adjustment is applied equally to all
speakers. As a courtesy, please turn cell phones off or set them in the silent mode.
5)APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of January 10, 2018
Item 5.0 - January Minutes
February 14, 2018
Page 2
Harbor Commission Meeting
6)CURRENT BUSINESS
1.New Dock Proposed at 2223 Bayside Drive
The applicant at 2223 Bayside Drive is proposing to build a brand new dock system which
would be the first dock ever built at this property. Council Policy H-1 requires a special
permit be approved by the Harbor Commission for dock projects in this area of the harbor.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Review the proposed dock project and approve.
Item 6.1 - New Dock at 2223 Bayside Drive - Staff Report
Item 6.1 - New Dock at 2223 Bayside Drive - Attachment A Proposal
Item 6.1 - New Dock at 2223 Bayside Drive - Attachment B Outreach Letter
2.City Harbormaster Report on Harbor Operations
City Harbormaster Dennis Durgan will provide an update on Harbor Operations including a
presentation by the City’s Information Technology (IT) Division detailing their newly created
mooring management software.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Receive and file.
Item 6.2 - Harbor Operations Update
Item 6.2 - Harbor Operations Update - PPT
February 14, 2018
Page 3
Harbor Commission Meeting
3.Mooring Revocation: J-211
Mooring permits may be revoked for failure to comply with any of the regulations listed in
Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") Sections 17.60.040(K)(1) and 17.70.020.
According to NBMC Chapter 17.70.020(B), the Harbor Commission shall conduct a public
hearing prior to revoking a mooring permit.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is
not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical
change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Hold a public hearing, consider the relevant evidence, and if justified under NBMC
Sections 17.60.040(K)(1) and 17.70.020, revoke Mooring Permit J-211 based on the
following reasons:
a) Failure to maintain the vessel in compliance with the applicable mooring regulations in
NBMC Section 17.25.020(I) and make the necessary repairs as requested by the City.
NBMC Sections 17.60.040(K)(1)(a) and 17.070.020(A)(6).
b) Failure and/or refusal to allow an inspection of the vessel to determine if it is seaworthy
and operable. NBMC Section 17.60.040(K)(1)(b).
c) Failure to comply with the conditions upon which the permit was issued. NBMC Section
17.70.020(A)(8).
Item 6.3 - Mooring J-211 Revocation - Staff Report
Item 6.3 - Mooring J-211 Revocation - Attachment A
Item 6.3 - Mooring J-211 Revocation - Attachment B
Item 6.3 - Mooring J-211 Revocation - Attachment C
Item 6.3 - Mooring J-211 Revocation - Attachment D
4.Turning Basin Anchorage - Proposal for Permanent Year-Round Status
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Review the proposal to designate the anchorage area in the Turning Basin as
permanent year-round, and make recommendations for staff to forward to the City Council
for consideration.
Item 6.4 - Proposed Permanent Anchorage - Staff Report
Item 6.4 - Proposed Permanent Anchorage - Attachment A
February 14, 2018
Page 4
Harbor Commission Meeting
5.Harbor Commission Objectives for Calendar Year 2018: Formation of Ad Hoc
Committees
The Harbor Commission will form ad hoc committees for each of their Functional Areas
within the 2018 Harbor Commission Objectives.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Form ad hoc committees for each of the Functional Areas within the Harbor
Commission Objectives.
Item 6.5 - HC Objectives - HC Staff Report
Item 6.5 - HC Objectives - Attachment A
6.Mooring Lengths within the Offshore and Onshore Fields: Review of Current
Practice
Staff will review the current procedure regarding permittees’ requests to increase mooring
lengths, and will then ask the Harbor Commission for a recommended path forward. In
addition, staff is seeking a recommendation on maximum onshore mooring lengths.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Direct the ad hoc committee established for Harbor Commission Objective 3.2 to study
the issue and to return to the Commission with a recommended path forward.
Item 6.6 - Mooring Extension Requests - HC Staff Report
Item 6.6 - Mooring Extension Requests - Attachment A
Item 6.6 - Mooring Extension Requests - Attachment B
February 14, 2018
Page 5
Harbor Commission Meeting
7.Derelict Vessel Definition: Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation
At the November 2017 meeting, the Harbor Commission directed the derelict vessel ad
hoc committee to return to the Commission with an updated definition of a derelict vessel.
The ad hoc committee does not recommend any changes to the definition at this time.
Therefore, the ad hoc committee’s initial responsibilities are complete and the committee
consisting of Commissioners Cunningham and Drayton should be disbanded.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Receive and file the ad hoc committee’s recommendation of not changing the current
definition of a derelict vessel.
3. Disband the derelict vessel ad hoc committee.
Item 6.7 - Derelict Vessel Definition Staff Report
8.Stand Up Paddleboard Ad Hoc Committee: Disband
Because the stand up paddleboard ad hoc committee fulfilled their original responsibilities
in late 2017, the ad hoc committee consisting of Commissioners Kenney, Blank and
Girling should be disbanded.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Disband the stand up paddleboard ad hoc committee.
Item 6.8 - Disband Stand Up Paddle Board Ad Hoc Committee - HC Staff Report
February 14, 2018
Page 6
Harbor Commission Meeting
9.Pumpouts in Newport Harbor: Review
Staff will present a brief review of the harbor’s pumpout facilities, particularly the five
stations owned and maintained by the City.
Recommendation:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Receive and file.
Item 6.9 - Pumpout Review - HC Staff Report
7)COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM)
8)QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH HARBOR RESOURCES MANAGER ON
HARBOR RELATED ISSUES
9)PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS OR QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS WITH HARBOR RESOURCES MANAGER
10)MATTERS WHICH COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE
AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM)
11)DATE AND TIME FOR NEXT MEETING: Wednesday, March 14, 2018
12)ADJOURNMENT
NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Council Chambers – 100 Civic Center Drive
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
6:30 PM
1) CALL MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m.
2) ROLL CALL
Commissioners: William Kenney, Jr., Chair
David Girling, Vice Chair
Scott Cunningham, Secretary
Ira Beer, Commissioner (absent)
Paul Blank, Commissioner
John Drayton, Commissioner
Duncan McIntosh, Commissioner
Staff Members: Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager
Carol Jacobs, Assistant City Manager
Dennis Durgan, Harbormaster
Ann Ewing, Deputy City Attorney
Raymund Reyes, Management Specialist
3) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Commissioner Drayton
4) PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Minutes of December 11, 2017
Commissioner Girling revised the final paragraph on page 5 to "…Commission Chairman should be the
liaison to the Marine Committee of the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce…"
Commissioner Girling moved approval of the draft Minutes for the December 11, 2017, meeting as
corrected. Commissioner McIntosh seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
6) CURRENT BUSINESS
1. Harbor Commission Objectives for Calendar Year 2018: Review and Approve
The Harbor Commission will review the proposed 2018 Objectives and recommend approval.
Recommendation:
1) Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2) Approve the proposed 2018 Harbor Commission Objectives and recommend they be
forwarded to the City Council for review and approval.
2
Commissioner Cunningham proposed adoption of Objectives 1.1 and 1.2 as written and Objective 1.3
modified to "establish a sustainable program that consistently re-nourishes the Harbor's sandy beaches on
a yearly basis."
Commissioner Drayton recommended adding "evaluate current enforcement of applicable City Codes
throughout the Harbor and to report regarding the City's first year of operations after July 1, 2018" to
Objective 2.1. Objective 2.1 will be the primary objective in 2018. After discussion, Commissioner Drayton
concurred with deleting Objective 2.3 as it is identical to Objective 3.1.
Commissioner Drayton proposed Objectives 3.1 and 3.2 for 2018. After discussion, Commissioner Drayton
agreed to delete Objective 3.5 and to focus on Objective 3.4 first with a focus on Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3,
and 3.6 to follow in that order.
After discussion, Commissioner McIntosh recommended adoption of Objective 4.1 revised to include review
of marine activities permit and Objective 4.3 as written, and deletion of Objective 4.2.
Commissioner Girling proposed deleting Objective 5.3 and revising Objective 5.1 to "establish a dialogue
with all users of the Harbor including the charter fleet industry, other commercial vessel operators and rental
concessions." The primary focus in 2018 would be revised Objective 5.1 and Objective 5.2.
Commissioner Blank recommended adoption of Objective 6.1 for 2018.
Commissioner Drayton moved to approve the revised 2018 Harbor Commission Objectives and
recommend they be forwarded to the City Council for review and approval. Commissioner Blank seconded
the motion. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
The Commission debated whether a Chairman for each Objective ad hoc committee was determined at the
prior meeting. With Deputy City Attorney Ann Ewing's input, Chair Kenney requested formation of ad hoc
committees for the 2018 Objectives be placed on the February agenda.
Assistant City Manager Carol Jacobs requested that the Commission name either her or Harbor Resources
Manager Miller as staff liaison to each committee.
Commissioner Blank requested that Commissioner Cunningham join him on a future committee for
functional area 6 with Assistant City Manager Jacobs as staff liaison. Commissioner Girling agreed with
Chair Kenney joining a future committee for functional area 5 with Harbor Resources Manager Miller as
staff liaison. Commissioner Cunningham suggested Harbor Resources Manager Miller as staff liaison for
a functional area 1 committee and requested Commissioners with experience in government agencies and
infrastructure planning join the committee at the appropriate time. Commissioner Drayton noted Assistant
City Manager Jacobs and Harbormaster Durgan would likely participate on a committee for functional area
2.
2. Council Policy Manual Update: Harbor and Beaches H Policies
The Harbor Commission will review and approve updates to the H Policies of the Council Policy
Manual.
Recommendation:
1) Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
3
2) Review and approve updates to Council Policy H-1.
3) Review and approve updates to Council Policy H-2.
4) Review and approve updates to Council Policy H-3.
5) Review and approve updates to Council Policy H-4.
6) Review and approve updates to Council Policy H-5.
7) Disband the ad hoc committees assigned to reviewing the Harbor and Beaches H Policies
(H-1: Blank and Drayton; H-2, H-3 & H-4: Girling and McIntosh; H-5: Cunningham, Beer,
and Kenney).
Commissioner Drayton reported that the committee conducted a comprehensive review of Policy H-1. The
committee did not seek to modify or change any previously approved limits but focused on the language
and attempted to clarify the approval hierarchy. Harbor Resources Manager Miller added that the
committee focused on areas where a dock can extend beyond the pierhead line, divided some sections,
and added examples to provide clarity. Reference maps are linked to the document text and included in
the appendix. The opening paragraph gives the Harbor Commission direction as to what it can allow if an
applicant requests an exception. Commissioners should determine whether a 10-foot extension beyond
the pierhead line is appropriate. After consideration of setting precedents and the need for a case-by-case
review, Commissioners agreed that "of up to 10 feet" should be deleted.
Jim Mosher questioned whether changes were so extensive that a redline version was not possible;
whether the Commission's decisions to approve and deny can be appealed; whether the Policy should
provide the Harbor Commission with guidance for allowing an extension; and whether the text or map
controls in the event of a conflict between the two.
Chair Kenney stated the text controls in the event of a discrepancy between the text and map. Deputy City
Attorney Ewing explained that any interested party can appeal a Harbor Commission decision, whether an
approval or denial. Harbor Resources Manager Miller clarified that the existing policy was completely
revised. The last sentence of the Policy states that an extension will not negatively impact navigation,
adjacent property owners or existing Harbor uses, and provides the Harbor Commission guidance to
approve or deny an exception.
Commissioner Girling advised that Policy H-2 was modified to update agency references. A typographical
error in Policy H-3 was corrected. Policy H-3 could be moved to a B Policy because Senior Services and
Recreation Director Laura Detweiler's staff is responsible for sensitive marine areas. Harbor Resources
Manager Miller believed Senior Services and Recreation Director Detweiler would welcome responsibility
for the Policy. Commissioners concurred with recommending transfer of Policy H-3 to a B Policy.
Commissioner Girling indicated revisions to Policy H-4 include corrections to grammar; a requirement for
the dory fleet to have a valid fishing permit; a requirement for the dory fleet to sell locally caught products;
and an update to the types of vessels used by the dory fleet.
Mr. Mosher concurred with the recommendation to transfer Policy H-3.
Commissioner Cunningham reported no changes for Policy H-5.
Commissioner Girling moved to approve the proposed updates to Policies H-1, H-2, H-4, and H-5 and to
transfer Policy H-3 to a B Policy. Commissioner McIntosh seconded the motion. The motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
3. Large Vessel Anchoring Requirements in the Turning Basin
The Harbor Commission will define the requirements concerning larger visiting vessels in the
Turning Basin area with specific focus on size, anchoring, style and permits. In addition, the current
ad hoc committee previously tasked with this issue will disband. The Harbor Commission will then
form a new ad hoc committee to review larger vessel fees as well as other fees related to moorings
and the Harbor Operations Division.
4
Recommendation:
1) Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2) Review and approve the requirements for larger vessels visiting Newport Harbor with
specific focus on 1) the minimum size vessel required to use the special area for larger
visiting vessels in the Turning Basin for a defined period of time; 2) the requirement to
anchor the large vessel bow and stem; and 3) the requirement for a permit for these large
vessels.
3) Disband the current ad hoc committee tasked with evaluating these anchorage
requirements.
4) Form a new ad hoc committee to review the potential fee associated with large vessel
anchoring as well as other Harbor Operations and mooring related fees.
Harbor Resources Manager Miller reported recommendation 2 is an error. The Harbor Commission should
focus on recommendation 4.
Chair Kenney reviewed the action taken in December 2016 with respect to large vessel anchorage. The
Harbor Commission should disband the ad hoc committee and create a new ad hoc committee to study
and recommend fair daily rental rates for large transient vessels that install their own mooring cans and
recommend daily rental rates for the use of on-shore and off-shore moorings, new sand line moorings at
Marina Park, Marina Park slips, and Marina Park dinghy racks. The committee will not study fees for 80-
foot or greater vessels that anchor in the large-vessel area.
Commissioner Blank moved to disband the large vessel anchorage ad hoc committee. Commissioner
McIntosh seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
Assistant City Manager Jacobs advised that the Netzer draft appraisal should be ready for the Commission
in April and the Council in May.
Commissioner Blank moved to form a subcommittee composed of Chair Kenney (ad hoc committee chair),
Commissioner McIntosh, and Commissioner Beer. Commissioner Drayton seconded the motion. The
motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
Harbor Resources Manager Miller indicated he will agendize an item regarding making the temporary
anchorage permanent for the February meeting and send public notice.
4. Harbor and Beaches Capital Plan – Review and Approve
The Harbor Commission will review and approve the Harbor and Beaches Capital Plan, and
recommend forwarding it to the City Council for approval.
Recommendation:
1) Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
5
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2) Approve the Harbor and Beaches Capital Plan and recommend staff forward to the City
Council for review and approval.
Harbor Resources Manager Miller reported staff revised the Capital Plan in response to Commissioners'
comments at the December meeting. Projects will never be removed from the Capital Plan but moved to
the bottom of the list. Public Works Director Dave Webb clarified that staff prioritized public piers by starting
year and within each year by most important to least important project.
Commissioner Blank requested a line item for acquisition of waterfront property for a launch ramp in the
Lower Bay be included in any savings plan for acquisition of property. Chair Kenney was aware of a
potential location with adequate parking; however, he did not know if it could be purchased or leased.
Commissioner Drayton suggested staff include some type of impediment along bridges to prevent people
from jumping off bridges.
Commissioner Cunningham suggested Upper Bay dredging be divided into two items, one for the basin
and one for the remaining navigational portion of the Upper Bay, and show 100% of the basin portion of
Upper Bay dredging with external funding. Perhaps the year for Lower Bay dredging should be revised to
2021 or 2022. Public Works Director Webb explained that the start date for a project is a guess. Staff will
proceed sooner if possible. He agreed to bifurcate the basin and navigational portions of the Upper Bay
dredging and show an external funding source.
Chair Kenney proposed a pumpout facility for bilge and gray water. Harbor Resources Manager Miller
noted a bilge project is found within item 10. Staff met earlier that day with county staff to discuss new
hazardous waste recycling facilities or improvements to existing recycling facilities.
Commissioner Drayton moved to approve the Harbor and Beaches Capital Plan as amended during the
discussion. Commissioner Cunningham seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following roll call
vote:
Ayes: Chair Kenney, Commissioner Girling, Commissioner Cunningham, Commissioner Blank,
Commissioner Drayton, Commissioner McIntosh
Absent: Commissioner Beer
7) COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS (NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS)
Commissioner Blank announced the finials on all public piers have been replaced or refreshed and look
fantastic.
8) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH HARBOR RESOURCES MANAGER ON HARBOR RELATED
ISSUES
Harbor Resources Manager Miller reported he is currently reviewing results of RGP sediment testing.
Lower Bay sediment testing began on January 7. He is also working on replacing signage at public piers.
Harbormaster Durgan advised that staff is organizing the office during the slow season and collecting storm
debris from the Harbor. He agreed to Commissioner Girling's request to provide the summary report to
Commissioners prior to meetings. Over the weekend, ten SUPs were cited for not wearing lifejackets.
9) PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS OR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH
HARBOR RESOURCES MANAGER
In response to Commissioner McIntosh's query, Harbor Resources Manager Miller indicated staff could rely
on the City's biennial eelgrass survey for near-shore projects. The next survey will occur in the summer.
6
10) MATTERS WHICH COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR
DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM)
None.
11) DATE AND TIME FOR NEXT MEETING: Wednesday, February 14, 2018
12) ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Harbor Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
8:30 p.m.
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _1_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: New Dock Proposed at 2223 Bayside Drive
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
The applicant at 2223 Bayside Drive is proposing to build a brand new dock system which would
be the first dock ever built at this property. Council Policy H-1 requires a special permit be
approved by the Harbor Commission for dock projects in this area of the harbor.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Review the proposed dock project and approve.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
DISCUSSION:
The applicant at 2223 Bayside Drive lives in the Carnation Cove area slightly east of the Harbor
Patrol’s facility and within Bulkhead Station Numbers 104 to 106. There has never been a dock
system as this location before, and the applicant, Ms. Manzo, is proposing to build a new dock as
described on the attached proposal. The proposed dock is not out of the ordinary, and extends
into the water within the same range as the neighbors’ docks. (The reason this dock and others
extend further out into the water is due to the rock outcroppings in this area and the shallow
depths.) The applicant is not asking for a variance on the dimensions nor location of the proposed
dock system. There is an abundance of eelgrass in the area, and the applicant will address this
issue with the regulatory agencies during the entitlement process.
In this part of the harbor, the Bulkhead and Pierhead Lines are farther out in the water as depicted
on the aerial photos. Therefore, Council Policy H-1, Section T states that between U.S. Bulkhead
New Dock Proposed at 2223 Bayside Drive
February 14, 2018
Page 2
Station Numbers 104 to 106, piers shall be subject to special permits approved by the Harbor
Commission.
Outreach letters were sent to neighbors within 300’ of the property, and as of the agenda
publication date, only one inquiry was received with a general question about eelgrass within the
dock footprint.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in
a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3)
(the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to
the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Proposal for New Dock at 2223 Bayside Drive
Attachment B – Outreach Letter to 300’ of Property
Dock and Pier Builders, Inc.
Contractor's License ZgToSz A
www.swiftslipdocks.com
635r Industry Way - Westminster, CA 9z68g
Telephone (g+g) 63r-3rzr
20 December zotT
Homeowner
22og Bayside Drive
Corona del Mar, California 92625
RE: Patricia Manzo Proposed Dock Project
2229 Bayside Drive
Corona del Mar. California
I am representing Patricia Manzo for the permitting of her proprosed dock project.
The scope of work for this proposed project is to install a new pier, pier platform, gangway, and U
shaped floating dock. I have enclosed a drawing of the proposed projer:t.
Our proposed project has kept into consideration the ingress and egress of the existing neighboring
docks.
We are currently under consideration for the required Approvall-in-Concept permit from the City of
Newport Beach, Harbor Resources Division. As I am certain you are a\vare, any overwater
improvements to this beautiful area of Newport Harbor require the apllroval from Harbor
Commission. We are working towards having this project heard at the January 2018 Harbor
Commission meeting.
I am writing today to inform you of this and to request any inpurt and thoughts you may have on the
proposed project. For your convenience I am available bytelephone arrd email. Or, if you prefer
communication by US Postal Service, that is also acceptable.
Jacquellm Chung, Permit Sper:ialist
Swift Slip Dock and Pier Builders, Inc.
635r IndustryWay
Westminster, California 9zr583
Telephone : g 4g.63r.gtz:l
Email : JacquelSm@swiftslipdocks.com
Through the permit process I am certain there will be additional commrunications between
neighboring parties. In anticipation, I would appreciate your communications specifying the names
associated with each respective address. I have provided a request forrn in addition to a self-
addressed and stamped envelope for your convenience.
I want to thank you, in advance, for your consideration, time, and assistance.
Please contact me directly if you should have any questions.
Jacqu
Permit
4'16'4'40'(3) 12" Pipe Piles10'x14' Pier(22) 10"Pipe Pile18'3'x24'Gangway4'6'Bulkhead Line Pierhead Line Project LineExtended Property LineExtended Property Line14'7'6351 Industry WayWestminster, CA, 92626Phone: (949) 631-3121Fax: (714) 509-0618C:\Users\Timothy\Downloads\Swift_Slip_Logo-Edited.png2223 Bayside Dr.Manzo1/30/18TLJCTL2215 Bayside Dr.2227 Bayside Dr.2223 Bayside Dr.187'40'25'239' to Seawall
0 100 200
--__l
Feet
Every reasonable effoft has been made to assure the
aocuracy of the data prcvided, however, The City of I
\ewoon Be3ch and its enlployees and agents
i sclairn an), anC all responsibility from or relating to
any re:;ults ,lbtained in ts use.
2t109-2013 photos provided by Eagle
lmagin g ww.eagleaerial.com
Disclaimer
Feet
Imagery:2009-2013 photos provided by Eagle Imaging www.eagleaerial.com
Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data
provided, however, The City of Newport Beach and its employees and
agents disclaim any and all responsibility from or relating to any results
obtained in its use.
Disclaimer:
2/9/2018
0 400200Newport
Beach
GIS
cJf
t/ ry6
I
T
--+&ffituFrtyh TI O1?PF.b d
,___],\LM a|w
---+-
@
6351 Industry Woy
Weslminster. CA.92626
Phone: (949) 531-3121
Fox {714) 509-0618
ru6:
2223BoysideDr.
Erci?Int lBr:la^E
l.t I FlFdi. |@ viib.TL
ru:
Monzo TL
DilN.
JC
CH€CXED.
IL
REIEFN.
tlt2vtT
OATE AMENDMENTS:
0 100 200
--__l
Feet
Every reasonable effoft has been made to assure the
aocuracy of the data prcvided, however, The City of I
\ewoon Be3ch and its enlployees and agents
i sclairn an), anC all responsibility from or relating to
any re:;ults ,lbtained in ts use.
2t109-2013 photos provided by Eagle
lmagin g ww.eagleaerial.com
Disclaimer
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _2_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Dennis Durgan, Harbormaster - 949-270-8158,
ddurgan@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager – 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: City Harbormaster Report on Harbor Operations
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
City Harbormaster Dennis Durgan will provide an update on Harbor Operations including a
presentation by the City’s Information Technology (IT) Division detailing their newly created
mooring management software.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Receive and file.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in
a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3)
(the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to
the environment, directly or indirectly.
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
Mooring Administration in
Newport Harbor
Review & Update
HARBOR COMMISSION
Wednesday, February 14, 2018
Presented by:
Dennis Durgan, City Harbormaster
Harbor Clean Up
Storm Prep
Municipal Operations department has assisted
Harbor Operations many times in pulling large
water logged items from the harbor, including
trees and recliners.
Code Enforcement
Before
After
Code Enforcement
Harbormaster’s Office:
1.Beta testing 3 iPads and new mounts on Harbormaster 1,2
and 3
2.Working with IT on statistics, new software
3.Working on Policies and Procedures
4.Dealing with many complaints regarding unkempt boats &
impounds stored in the Harbor
5.5 transfers completed in January 2018, 2 pending
completion (39 since 7/1/17)
February 14, 2018
Harbor Operations Application
Avery Maglinti : Sr. IT Analyst
Additional Materials Presented at the
2-14-2018 Harbor Commission Meeting
Marina Park 2015
System Requirements 2017
•Integrates with existing City Billing system
•Integrates with existing City Financial system
•Manage long term permit holder data
•Vessel Registration & Insurance Management
•Overhaul Management
•Mooring Inspections
•Provides flexible reporting
•Take online/mobile reservations from the public
•Streamline the check-in/check-out process
Recommendation
July 2017 December 2017 April 2018 August 2018
Use existing software for
initial transition from Harbor
Patrol to CNB Harbor
Operations.
TRANSITION
Mooring, slip, vessel, overhaul,
& document management
system delivered.
MANAGEMENT APP
Reservation system and online
reservation system delivered.
RESERVATIONS
Long term permit holder for
mooring or slip uploads
overhaul, registration &
insurance documentation.
PERMITTEE PORTAL
Implementation
Inventory & Maps Hardware & Data App Development
GIS Operations Applications
What’s Next?
July 2017 December 2017 April 2018 August 2018
Use existing software for
initial transition from Harbor
Patrol to CNB Harbor
Operations.
TRANSITION
Mooring, slip, vessel, overhaul,
& document management
system delivered.
MANAGEMENT APP
Reservation system and online
reservation system delivered.
RESERVATIONS
Long term permit holder for
mooring or slip uploads
overhaul, registration &
insurance documentation.
PERMITTEE PORTAL
Thank You!
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _3_
ABSTRACT:
Mooring permits may be revoked for failure to comply with any of the regulations listed in
Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") Sections 17.60.040(K)(1) and 17.70.020.
According to NBMC Chapter 17.70.020(B), the Harbor Commission shall conduct a public
hearing prior to revoking a mooring permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and
15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Hold a public hearing, consider the relevant evidence, and if justified under NBMC
Sections 17.60.040(K)(1) and 17.70.020, revoke Mooring Permit J-211 based on
the following reasons:
a) Failure to maintain the vessel in compliance with the applicable mooring
regulations in NBMC Section 17.25.020(I) and make the necessary repairs as
requested by the City. NBMC Sections 17.60.040(K)(1)(a) and
17.070.020(A)(6).
b) Failure and/or refusal to allow an inspection of the vessel to determine if it is
seaworthy and operable. NBMC Section 17.60.040(K)(1)(b).
c) Failure to comply with the conditions upon which the permit was issued. NBMC
Section 17.70.020(A)(8).
TO: Harbor Commission
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager
PREPARED BY: Matt Cosylion, Code Enforcement Supervisor
PHONE: 949-644-3217
TITLE: Mooring Revocation: J-211
Mooring Revocation: J-211
February 14, 2018
Page 2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
If the permit is revoked, the permittee must recover the mooring equipment and/or the
vessel within 30 days of reversion or the City may auction the equipment and vessel or
otherwise dispose of them in a manner approved by law.
The permittee shall be entitled to payment from the City of the fair value of the mooring
equipment as depreciated by use in an amount to be determined by the Harbor Resources
Manager as set in the City’s master fee resolution, NBMC 17.60.040(L)(1)(2).
DISCUSSION:
Background:
The City manages the tidelands pursuant to various legislative grants from the State of
California. The City leases the tidelands to third parties through a series of permits,
franchises, and leases. One of the permits administered by the City is the mooring permit.
A mooring permit is a temporary use of a specific location within Newport Harbor. The
Harbor Resources Manager may issue a mooring permit, which allows an individual to
use a portion of the waters of Newport Harbor for the mooring of a vessel.
The City assumed direct management of the mooring fields from the Orange County
Sheriff's Department in July 2017. As part of this transition, Harbor Operations and Code
Enforcement staff inspected all the moorings to determine if the vessels have current
registration, insurance, and they are maintained in compliance with the mooring
regulations in NBMC Section 17.25.020(I).
Mooring and Vessel Description:
Mooring Permit J-211 ("the Permit") was issued to Mr. Tod J. Stokes on August 21, 2013
by the Orange County Sheriff's Harbor Patrol Division. The Permit authorized Mr. Stokes
to install mooring equipment at Mooring J-211 ("the Mooring"), which is located just east
of 19th Street in the “J” mooring field (Attachment A).
The assigned vessel currently moored on J-211 is the sailboat Adventures, a 47.9-foot
long recreational vessel. City records indicate the Adventures was in the process of
documentation with the National Vessel Documentation Center in August 2013.
However, the owner has not provided a current certificate of documentation, proof of
insurance coverage, or vessel registration to the City.
Mooring Revocation: J-211
February 14, 2018
Page 3
Enforcement:
City staff inspected the Mooring on November 17, 2017 and noted the following violations
of NBMC Section 17.25.020(I):
• Propagation of unsanitary conditions from the accumulation of fecal materials
• Excessive dirt and bird/animal feces on the vessel
• The masts are not secured in an upright position
• Lack of current registration/documentation/insurance
• The vessel appeared to be inoperable and not seaworthy
Based on the appearance of the vessel and lack of documentation, Code Enforcement
staff mailed a Notice of Violation to the owner on November 22, 2017 (Attachment B).
A subsequent inspection of the Mooring on December 11, 2017 revealed that no
corrections had been made, and the permittee had not contacted the City in response to
the warning notice. A letter advising the permittee of the City's intent to revoke the Permit
was sent by First Class and Certified U.S. Mail on December 13, 2017, and a copy was
posted on the vessel on December 15, 2017. The certified letter was returned to the City
as undeliverable with no return address while the first class letter was not returned
(Attachment C).
On January 24, 2018, staff called and left voicemails at the two phone numbers the City
has on file for the permittee. The permittee has not returned those phone calls.
On January 26, 2018, City staff inspected the vessel and found that it had not been
cleaned, and the permittee had not contacted the City to discuss the condition of the
vessel. As such, staff posted a third notice on the vessel and mailed a copy by First Class
and U.S. Certified Mail notifying the permittee of the date for the revocation hearing and
the reasons for revocation (Attachment D).
It should be noted that the certified letter, dated January 26, 2018, was delivered and
signed for by the Permittee’s agent, Michael Arenlz, on January 29, 2018. However, City
staff are not aware of any attempt by the permittee or his agent to contact the City to
address this matter (Attachment D).
Pursuant to NBMC Sections 17.60.040(K)(2) and 17.70.020(B), a revocation hearing is
scheduled before the Harbor Commission to provide a forum for the permittee to present
evidence to the Harbor Commission explaining why the mooring permit should not be
revoked. The Harbor Commission presides over the hearing, receives relevant evidence,
and renders a decision.
Mooring Revocation: J-211
February 14, 2018
Page 4
Grounds for Revocation
NBMC Sections 17.60.040(K)(1) and 17.70.020(A)(8) provide that when a permittee has
breached or failed to comply with the terms or conditions contained in the permit or upon
which the permit was granted, the Harbor Commission may revoke the permit.
Additionally, NBMC Section 17.60.040(K)(1)(a) authorizes the Harbor Commission to
revoke the permit for failure to maintain the vessel in compliance with the mooring
regulations in NBMC Section 17.25.020(I), which include seaworthiness, operability, and
keeping a vessel free of excessive dirt, debris, and animal feces.
Furthermore, NBMC Section 17.60.040(K)(1)(b) directs the Harbor Commission to revoke
a permit if the owner has failed or refuses to allow an inspection to determine if the vessel
is seaworthy and operable and/or a public nuisance.
Mooring Permit Conditions
The permittee shall be responsible for complying with all conditions and activities related
to the mooring permit. According to NBMC Section 17.60.040(B)(2)(f, g), the permittee
is responsible for providing proof of current insurance and registration to the City.
Moorings Reverted to the City
Should the Harbor Commission vote to revoke the Permit, the mooring will revert to the
City per NBMC Section 17.60.040(L). The permittee shall be entitled to recover all of the
mooring equipment and the vessel within 30 days of reversion. If the permittee does not
recover the equipment/vessel, the City may auction the equipment/vessel or dispose of
them in a manner approved by the law.
The City may publicly auction the mooring, or the City can use the mooring for other
purposes such as renting to a sub-permittee.
APPEAL PERIOD:
Should the Harbor Commission render a decision to revoke the mooring permit, staff will
send a Notice of Decision to the permittee. The decision to revoke a permit shall become
final fourteen (14) days after the date of the decision unless appealed.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Mooring Revocation: J-211
February 14, 2018
Page 5
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Pictures of J-211
Attachment B – Notice of Violation
Attachment C – Notice of Intent to Revoke Permit
Attachment D – Notice of Public Hearing date
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _4_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Turning Basin Anchorage – Proposal for Permanent Year-Round Status
___________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
The Harbor Commission will discuss the concept of establishing the anchorage in the Turning
Basin as permanent year-round.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Review the proposal to designate the anchorage area in the Turning Basin as permanent
year-round, and make recommendations for staff to forward to the City Council for
consideration.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
DISCUSSION:
At the October 2017 meeting, the Harbor Commission requested staff to forward a
recommendation to the City Council to establish a seasonal anchorage in the Turning Basin. The
criteria associated with this seasonal anchorage would be:
1. The anchorage would be established the week before Memorial Day through the week
following Labor Day.
2. The anchorage would conform to the size boundaries previously established by the Harbor
Commission and approved by the City Council in 2016. (Attachment A)
3. No raft-ups allowed.
Turning Basin Anchorage – Proposal for Permanent Year-Round Status
February 14, 2018
Page 2
4. No bright lights nor loud music after 9:00 PM.
5. Length of stay rules will be enforced by the City Harbormaster.
6. The City Harbormaster may temporarily adjust the boundaries, as needed, for special
events or regattas, boat shows etc…
At the November 2017 meeting, the Harbor Commission directed staff to agendize the issue of
whether the anchorage in the Turning Basin be designated as permanent year-round or remain
as previously recommended as permanent seasonal.
For clarification, the City Council had previously directed staff to install a trial anchorage in the
Turning Basin in 2015, 2016 and 2017. Staff intends to return to Council for permission to install
another trial anchorage for 2018.
Permanent designation whether seasonal or year-round also requires regulatory approval from
the usual agencies including the Coast Guard who also has direct responsibility over the main
navigational channel. Staff recently met with the Coast Guard who advised that permitting the
anchorage, if approved, could take a significant time considering the steps involved to update the
nautical charts for Newport Harbor (federal review process via the federal registry).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in
a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3)
(the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to
the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – 2016 City Council Approved Trial Anchorage Area
58 ft.
90 ft.LargeVessel Area325 ft.300 ft.255 ft.250 ft.
D
C
A
B
Z Marker
I 0 200100
Feet
Trial Anchora ge Council Approved May 2016
Trial_Anchorage_May2016.mxd
Anch ora g e Buoys
A: 33.6188, -117.9266
B: 33.6191, -117.9262
C: 33.6184, -117.9247
D: 33.6174, -117.9257
Z Marker: 33.6177, -117.9247
T U R N I N G B A S I N
Turning Basin Anchorage -
Proposal for Permanent Year-Round Status
1
Harbor Commission
February 14, 2018
Additional materials presented at the
2-14-2018 Harbor Commission Meeting
2
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _5_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Harbor Commission Objectives for Calendar Year 2018: Formation
of Ad Hoc Committees
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
The Harbor Commission will form ad hoc committees for each of their Functional Areas
within the 2018 Harbor Commission Objectives.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and
15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Form ad hoc committees for each of the Functional Areas within the Harbor
Commission Objectives.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
Harbor Commission Objectives for Calendar Year 2018: Formation of Ad Hoc
Committees
February 14, 2018
Page 2
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Newport Harbor Commission Objectives, Calendar Year 2018
City of Newport Beach
Harbor Commission Purpose & Charter
Newport Harbor supports numerous recreational and commercial activities, waterfront residential
communities and scenic and biological resources. The purpose of the Harbor Commission is to
provide the City of Newport Beach with an advisory body representing these diverse uses of Newport
Harbor and its waterfront.
1. Advise the City Council in all matters pertaining to the use, control, operation, promotion and
regulation of all vessels and watercraft within Newport Harbor.
2. Approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications on all harbor permits where the
City of Newport Beach Municipal Code assigns the authority for the decision to the Harbor
Commission.
3. Serve as an appellate and reviewing body for decisions of the City Manager on harbor permits,
leases, and other harbor-related administrative matters where the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code assigns such authority to the Harbor Commission.
4. Advise the City Council on proposed harbor-related improvements.
5. Advise the Planning Commission and City Council on land use and property development
applications referred to the Harbor Commission by the City Council, Planning Commission, or
the City Manager.
6. Make recommendations to the City Council for the adoption of regulations and programs
necessary for the ongoing implementation of the goals, objectives, policies of the Harbor and
Bay Element of the General Plan, the Harbor Area Management Plan, and the Tidelands
Capital Plan.
7. Advise the City Council on the implementation of assigned parts of the Tidelands Capital Plan
such as:
• Dredging priorities
• In-bay beach sand replenishment priorities
• Harbor amenities such as mooring support service areas and public docks
Harbor Commission - 2018 Objectives
The following objectives are intended to support the mission of the Harbor Area Management
Plan and the two most essential responsibilities of the Harbor Commission: (1) Ensuring the long‐
term welfare of Newport Harbor for all residential, recreational, and commercial users; (2)
Promoting Newport Harbor as a preferred and welcoming destination for visitors and residents
alike.
These calendar year 2018 Objectives are subject to the review and approval of the Commission,
and final approval by the Newport Beach City Council. Harbor Commission ad hoc committees,
as established by the Commission, bear principal responsibility for coordinating the Commission’s
efforts, along with staff support, in achieving these Objectives.
City of Newport Beach - Harbor Commission
2018 Objectives
2018 Objectives Functional Area
1.1 Identify sustainable low-cost solutions to dredge the
deep-water channels throughout the harbor.
1.2 Identify opportunities to streamline the RGP54 permit
process.
1.3 Evaluate options for near shore dredging. Establish a
sustainable program that consistently nourishes harbor
beaches on a yearly basis.
1.0 Harbor Dredging
(Cunningham)
Advise the City Council on:
o Dredging methodologies
o Dredging priorities
o Eelgrass protection
o Beach re-nourishment
2.1 Evaluate current enforcement of applicable City codes
throughout the harbor. Report back to Commission by
July.
Future Priorities
A. Work with Harbormaster’s office to evaluate mooring
management and oversight.
B. Identify and address derelict vessels in the harbor.
2.0 Harbor Operations and
Management
(Drayton)
o Matters pertaining to use,
control, operation, promotion,
regulation of all vessels and
watercraft.
3.1 Evaluate potential enhancements to city amenities
provided to mooring permittees, residents and visitors.
3.2 Establish policies for modifications to mooring size.
Future Priorities
A. Complete evaluation for establishing day moorings
off Big Corona beach.
B. Evaluate options to consolidate and reduce the
footprint of current mooring fields.
3.0 Harbor Amenities and Capital
Improvements (Mooring Fields,
Shore Facilities, Docks)
(Beer)
o Advise the City Council on
proposed harbor-related
improvements.
o Advise the City Council on
harbor amenities such as
mooring support service
areas and public docks.
4.1 Review and update City Municipal Codes, Title 17,
Harbor Policies 1-5 and Marine Activities Permits.
4.2 Secure California Department of Recreation approval for
an amendment to the Harbor Code granting an
exception to the harbor speed limit for sanctioned sail
racing and human powered racing events. With such
authorization, recommend a Harbor Code amendment to
the City Council.
4.0 Harbor Policies, Codes,
Regulations
(McIntosh)
o Approve, conditionally
approve, or disapprove
applications on all harbor
permits.
o Serve as an appellate and
reviewing body for decisions
on harbor permits, leases,
and other harbor-related
administrative matters.
City of Newport Beach - Harbor Commission
2018 Objectives
2018 Objectives Functional Area
5.1 Establish a dialogue with representatives of the Harbor
Charter Fleet industry, other commercial vessel
operators and rental concessionaires to promote best
practices for charter and commercial boat operations in
Newport Harbor with particular attention to vessel
specifications, noise and pollution control/compliance
and long-range plans for berthing.
5.2 Review current rental concessionaires for safety and
regulatory compliance (e.g. unpermitted rental
operations for SUP’s).
5.0 Commercial, Recreational and
Educational Activities
(Girling)
o Matters pertaining to use,
control, operation, promotion,
regulation of all vessels and
watercraft.
o Serve as an appellate and
reviewing body for decisions
of the City Manager on
harbor permits, leases, and
other harbor-related
administrative matters.
6.1 Draft a Harbor Plan that can be used independently or in
conjunction with an update to the General Plan and/or
Harbor Area Management Plan (HAMP). Specific
attention should be paid to state requirements including
conservation for harbors, MLPA/MPAs and fisheries and
work previously done by the Harbor Commission
related to preservation of marine related activities and
businesses in Newport Harbor and the Harbor Financial
Master Plan.
Future Priorities
A. Create a Vision Statement for the Harbor describing
the purposes, uses and characteristics in the year
2050. Reference how that Vision aligns with the
current two most essential responsibilities of the
Harbor Commission: (1) Ensuring the long-term
welfare of Newport Harbor for all residential,
recreational, and commercial users; (2) Promoting
Newport Harbor as a preferred and welcoming
destination for visitors and residents alike.
6.0 Long Term Vision for Harbor
(Harbor Strategic Planning)
(Blank)
o Advise the City Council on
the City General Plan.
Harbor Commission Objectives
Calendar Year 2018:
Formation of Ad Hoc Committees
Harbor Commission
February 14, 2018
Additional materials presented at the
2-14-2018 Harbor Commission Meeting
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _6_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Mooring Lengths within the Offshore and Onshore Fields: Review
of Current Practice
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
Staff will review the current procedure regarding permittees’ requests to increase mooring
lengths, and will then ask the Harbor Commission for a recommended path forward. In
addition, staff is seeking a recommendation on maximum onshore mooring lengths.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and
15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Direct the ad hoc committee established for Harbor Commission Objective 3.2 to
study the issue and to return to the Commission with a recommended path forward.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
DISCUSSION:
Mooring Length Requests
On average, there are approximately two to five requests per month to increase mooring
lengths in all of the mooring areas. When the reasons are given, they vary from the desire
to upgrade to a larger vessel or to maximize their mooring length for future use.
Historically, requests for increases were considered for approval by the Harbor Patrol
through specific criteria identified by the City, which was:
Mooring Lengths within the Offshore and Onshore Fields: Review of Current Practice
February 14, 2018
Page 2
1. All requests were to be field verified to ensure the increase did not crowd or impede
the fairways between the rows, or did not extend beyond the outer boundaries of
the mooring field.
2. Increases up to 10 feet were considered reasonable. Increases of 15 feet or more
were seldom approved and required greater scrutiny.
3. Not all requests were approved.
4. Mooring weights and chain sizes were increased at the permittee’s expense, and
the annual fee would be increased as well.
For reference, the permittee’s annual mooring rent is based on the size of the mooring
rather than the size of the vessel on the mooring. It is the permittee’s choice to moor any
size vessel on the mooring as long as it is equal to or less than the registered mooring
length.
In addition, there is a concern about the possible scenario of increasing the mooring
length only to quickly sell the mooring at an increased profit. Should this be allowed given
that the tidelands are public and granted from the state?
Lastly, if left unchecked, the mooring fields would continue to change their sizing mix and
could potentially skew the number of moorings towards the larger sizes rather than a
broad, general range of sizes. To help the Harbor Commission analyze this factor,
Attachment A graphically shows the number of moorings for each size (always 5-foot
increments) both from an overall perspective as well as within each mooring field.
Staff is requesting a recommendation from the Harbor Commission as to whether
requests for increasing the mooring size should be considered, and if so, under what
criteria. Currently, staff has temporarily suspended approvals for mooring increases until
input from the Harbor Commission is received.
Onshore Mooring Sizes:
Currently, the maximum size vessel permitted on an onshore mooring is 18 feet (not
including the outboard engine). By default, onshore moorings are billed at 18 feet unless
the permittee has contacted the City and designated an Assigned Vessel that is smaller,
at which point they are billed for the size of the boat.
Staff is requesting Commission input as to whether 18 feet should continue be the
maximum size for onshore moorings, or whether it should be increased to accommodate
larger vessels. Potential considerations to this decision include: 1) impact to adjacent
Mooring Lengths within the Offshore and Onshore Fields: Review of Current Practice
February 14, 2018
Page 3
onshore moorings or boats on residential piers, 2) impact to street-end beach access,
and 3) impact to the beaches.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Mooring Lengths within Each Mooring Field
Attachment B – Aerials of Mooring Fields H, J and K
0204060801001201401601802006' 7' 8' 9' 10' 11' 12' 13' 14' 15' 16' 17' 18' 20' 25' 30' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 90' 95'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHTotal Moorings by Size0510152025303530' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 90' 95'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTH Offshore Moorings ‐Field A02468101214161830' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field B
012345678925' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐BYC0246810121416182035' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 75'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field C051015202530' 35' 40' 45' 50' 60' 65'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field D0123456760' 80'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Marina Park
0123456730' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field F05101520253030' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field H0510152025303540455030' 35' 40' 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field J01234567830' 35' 40' 45' 50' 60' 65'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOffshore Moorings ‐Field K
01234568' 10' 11' 13' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐Lido Nord00.511.522.510' 11' 13' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐Lido Soud05101520253035406' 7' 8' 9' 10' 11' 12' 13' 14' 15' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐North Bay Front0123456789108' 9' 10' 12' 13' 14' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐E Bay Front
0123456789107' 8' 9' 10' 11' 12' 13' 14' 15' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐Peninsula051015202530357' 8' 9' 10' 11' 12' 13' 14' 15' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐South Bay Front0246810128' 9' 12' 13' 14' 15' 16' 17' 18'QUANTITYMOORING LENGTHOnshore Moorings ‐West Newport
Feet
Imagery:2009-2013 photos provided by Eagle Imaging www.eagleaerial.com
Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data
provided, however, The City of Newport Beach and its employees and
agents disclaim any and all responsibility from or relating to any results
obtained in its use.
Disclaimer:
2/8/2018
0 833417Newport
Beach
GIS
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _7_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Derelict Vessel Definition: Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
At the November 2017 meeting, the Harbor Commission directed the derelict vessel ad
hoc committee to return to the Commission with an updated definition of a derelict vessel.
The ad hoc committee does not recommend any changes to the definition at this time.
Therefore, the ad hoc committee’s initial responsibilities are complete and the committee
consisting of Commissioners Cunningham and Drayton should be disbanded.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and
15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Receive and file the ad hoc committee’s recommendation of not changing the
current definition of a derelict vessel.
3. Disband the derelict vessel ad hoc committee.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Derelict Vessel Definition: Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation
February 14, 2018
Page 2
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _8_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Stand Up Paddleboard Ad Hoc Committee: Disband
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
Because the stand up paddleboard ad hoc committee fulfilled their original responsibilities in late
2017, the ad hoc committee consisting of Commissioners Kenney, Blank and Girling should be
disbanded.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project
as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
2. Disband the stand up paddleboard ad hoc committee.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in
a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3)
(the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to
the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
NEWPORT BEACH
Harbor Commission Staff Report
CITY OF
February 14, 2018
Agenda Item No. _9_
TO: HARBOR COMMISSION
FROM: Chris Miller, Harbor Manager - 949-644-3043,
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Pumpouts in Newport Harbor: Review
______________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT:
Staff will present a brief review of the harbor’s pumpout facilities, particularly the five stations
owned and maintained by the City.
RECOMMENDATION:
1.Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity
is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical
change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
2.Receive and file.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the Harbor Commission find this action exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result
in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and
15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines,
California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting
in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the Harbor Commission considers the item).
PUMPOUTS IN NEWPORT HARBOR
–REVIEW
Harbor Commission
February 14, 2018
Additional materials presented at the
2-14-2018 Harbor Commission Meeting
= City Owned
Washington Street
Fernando Street
American Legion
Balboa Yacht Basin
Placard on the City’s Stations
Questions?
Chris Miller, Harbor Manager
cmiller@newportbeachca.gov
(949) 644-3043