Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Airport Compatibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newport Beach council signals intent to override Airport Land Use Commission on proposed Snug Harbor surf park
Summary
After a staff briefing, the council voted unanimously to send a resolution indicating intent to override the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's inconsistency finding for a proposed surf park at the former Newport Beach Golf Course; public commenters raised concerns about occupancy caps, special events and potential liability.
The Newport Beach City Council voted on Sept. 9 to send a resolution of intent to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) indicating the council may override a prior ALUC determination that a proposed Snug Harbor surf park is inconsistent with the airport land use plan.
Assistant City Manager Simone Georges told the council the item before them was not a vote on the project's merits but a procedural resolution that would notify ALUC that the city may intend to override its inconsistency finding. "The only thing that's before you is a resolution that you're gonna send... that you may intend to override them when this item actually does come before you on October 28," Georges said.
Public commenters pressed the council on airport compatibility and crowding at the site. Jim Mosher noted apparent differences between the applicant's daily occupancy numbers and the allowance for up to 12 special events per year with no specified attendance caps: "In their report, there would be a maximum of 388 people there at one time... that resolution allows 12 special events per year, and each of those 12 special events appears to have no limit on it whatsoever," Mosher said, urging caution on overriding the airport panel.
Adam Leverenz and Mike Smith echoed concerns about potential liability and safety if large crowds were allowed near the airport. Leverenz warned of putting large spectator stands near an active runway and said the question of liability and compatibility deserved careful consideration.
Council action: Council member Grama moved to send the resolution of intent to ALUC; Council member Weber seconded. The city clerk recorded the motion as carrying unanimously by the members present.
What this does and does not do: The council's action sends a notice that it may override ALUC's inconsistency finding when the actual project comes back on Oct. 28; it is not a final project approval. Staff and commenters repeatedly noted that additional materials, including environmental review (EIR) documents and letters from airport management and Caltrans, will accompany the project record before the council's substantive vote.
Next steps: The project will return to the council for consideration on Oct. 28 with staff reports and materials. The ALUC, county airport management and other agencies are expected to submit additional comments before that hearing.
