Oceanside City Hall
Oceanside City Council Chambers
300 North Coast Hwy.
Oceanside, CA 92054

Click here for Google map

Click to read full Agenda

We want to thank you for your time and help at our meeting with you last Tuesday.    We've number the points for reference:

1.  Thank you again for the meeting.  We know CCC staff time is valuable.  We intent this to be discussion rather than a presentation.  We will provide handouts as we go along to facilitate discussion of two key topics.  (To View Attachments Click Here)

2. DPBA has continued to work closely with OC DPH, harbor merchants and other stakeholders in the way that we said we would, and as CCC staff recommended during our meetings last June.  We are extremely pleased and encouraged by the progress.  A team has been established that should bode well for all stakeholders, including boaters in the years ahead.

3. Thank you very much for the inclusion of language within the Staff Report providing  recommendations for expansion of recreational uses in the west end of the harbor.  This is an important boater issue and an opportunity that we believe is well addressed at this point.  OC DPH has a refinement (specific inclusion of hand launch vessels as a planning area designated use) and that we understand they will be discussing this tomorrow  We support this inclusion.

4. One of our major points is, balance and harmony between the various uses of the harbor is a key boater concern.  At this time DPBA has assumed two important roles in addressing this:

i.  DPBA is driving participation and support of the OC DPH chaired Boater Focus Group (BFG).  This is the group that has invested thousands of hours reviewing 26 different alternative for slip layouts.  Initially boaters made up a small minority of attendees and outcomes were biased.  But with a lot of effort and cooperation by OC DPH and well as DPBA, this group has been turned well around.  It now represents a true and balanced boater perspective.

ii. With OC DPH's assistance as meeting organizer, DPBA is chairing the Parking Task Force (PTF).   This group has formally met 5 times over the past several months.   We anticipate this group will continue to meet into the foreseeable future.  While DPBA has been the primary presenter up until now, merchants are now volunteering to help lead the agenda.  We are encouraged as this is the way the local governance process works best - stakeholders sitting at the same table together to work things out.

5.  We are very grateful for CCC Staff's support of boaters on the key waterside issue, slip re-mix and slip loss. 

We sincerely appreciate Staff's action.  We of course recognize that this was made possible in major part by joint OC DPH and DPBA member commitment to making the BFG work.  The final results of our efforts being selection and boater voted endorsement of slip design alternative 3.5O.  DPBA strongly supports design alternative 3.5O.

6.  Our first handout today (prepared by OC DPH), clearly demonstrates cooperation and trust  that exists between DPBA and OC DPH.  This Excel spreadsheet addresses 2009 Labor Day weekend parking problems in planning area  MSC 1, the dry storage and trailer boat launch ramp.  

Clearly there are improvement opportunities here as 40% of the Labor Day weekend parkers in this "dedicated" boater area were actually non boaters and 20% were merchant staff.  That said,  one major issue from 2008, Catalina Express customer parking has already been addressed.  

In the months ahead we are confident that there will be further progress.  We also feel that all parties will significantly benefit from the proposed Harbor Parking Management Plan, which we are advised OC DPH is championing for inclusion in the LCPA.  

When looking at the percentages of boaters by boat type and their relative parking space requirements,  it is noteworthy that 46% of the total boat launches were jet skis.  As you probably realize, jet ski boaters leave smaller tow vehicle and trailer footprints.  DPBA therefore feels the OC DPH's current allocation of 18 spaces less than 10 x 40' would not represent a problem should the final design still have this specification.

7.  Our second handout today (2 pages) graphically displays a 8.5% reduction in land surface area within the proposed MSC 1 zone within the LUP, vs. what is available today.  An aside, when all marine services, including the shipyard reduction is considered, we calculate that the net loss is approximately 12%.

We are especially sensitive to further loss due to the experience of the last few years, as evidenced by past boater takeaways as well as the OC DPH takeaways within the spreadsheet just discussed.  We believe strongly that any loss of boating resources to commercial development is unacceptable.  Were Staff direction that the 8.5% shortfall could be fixed in CDP process we will accept that.  But from discussion today we understand that this is a LUP issue.  That this shortfall may not be later appealed during the CDP process.  As a consequence we are today mailing a letter to commissioners, alternatives as well as yourselves which updates our position on this and related MCS matters.  Thank you for this important clarification.  A copy of our letter is attached. 

8.  DPBA believes that the proposed boating-by-appointment facility (aka boat barn or dry-stack) is not mitigation for existing dry storage on the hard and must not be built unless additional surface acreage is provided for this new use.  In a DPBA boater poll conducted in the spring of 2007, with over 450 responses, not one boater stated that they would use a boating-by-appointment facility were it to be made available.   Some said they would leave the harbor, while some even said they would leave boating rather than use it.

Regardless, DPBA feels that there is no significant incremental benefit to the boater from having such a facility at the water's edge.  After all, if a boater is calling to make an appointment to gain access to their boat at a temporary berthing dock, what difference does it make to them where the boat is stored when it not in use?

Indeed, the opposite is true, the loss of temporary berthing slips for appointed boaters means less boaters can get appointments to pick up their boats in the morning and less boaters can get appointment to drop off their boats at end of day.  Note that this loss would be a direct and unavoidable result from the proposal that the facility be built to hang over the water, consuming space otherwise to be used for slips.  

An important aside, the boating-by-appointment facility already in successful operation in San Carlos, Baja, Mexico is an excellent example which clearly illustrates that offsite storage is a better solution.  In San Carlos, the storage facility is located two+ mikes from the water.  Another such facility is now in initial planning stage nearby in Dana Point as you know.  DPBA strongly supports boating-by-appointment via an offsite facility.

9.  Additional dedicated boater parking is needed for the proposed boating-by-appointment facility should it ever be built.  The needs of this constituency are identical to slip renters and warrant the use of the same parking solution.  We therefore advocate that a 3rd parking deck level be built (now  to allow for this additional dedicated boater parking.  It must be built before a boat barn facility could begin operating.

10. More dedicated boater planning is needed near the new commercial core slip tenant location.  Today parking is already an equally a severe problem to that shown in the handout and discussed above in regard to dry storage space tenants.  Mitigation is also needed for the increased travel distance that slip renting boaters would experience with approval of the LUP as now written.  We've been discussing this with OC DPH but believe that staff direction here would be helpful.

11. The proposed hotel, while 10-12 years away or more, is potentially a very significant boater issue.  We are not against it per se however.  Given it stays in the same surface SF footprint that exists today and continues to have an "affordable" objective.

12. As a follow-up to your question to us regarding the amount of boaters we expect to represent the DPBA at the upcoming CCC Hearing, we have polled some to our members and we expect 50 or more to be present at this hearing.

13. One major point we failed to address at our meeting with you is DPBA's desire to present at the upcoming Thursday, October 8, 2009 CCC Hearing, beyond the time allocated to the general public during the public comments portion of the agenda.  As an Association with over 500 dues paying members we also routinely communicate with 2300+ Dana Point boaters from throughout Southern California and other States.  We therefore speak for a sizable constituency and need more time to be fully heard.  What we are asking for is for your direction as to how we may obtain the minimum 15-20 minutes time we feel is needed and appropriate.

About The Dana Point Boaters Association

DPBA is an education and advocacy group for the recreational boaters of Dana Point Harbor. Membership is very inexpensive and open to families interested in the many different kinds of recreational boating in Southern California, from kayaking and fishing to sailboat racing and motor cruising.