Marinapark debate lingers well into night

Alicia Robinson

Residents arguing the pros and cons of the contentious Marinapark

hotel resort development proposal packed City Council chambers

Tuesday.

The council was expected to vote late Tuesday night on certifying

the project’s environmental report. A certified report means the

council must place the Marinapark project on the ballot. If the

report is rejected, it could be the death of the Marinapark resort.

If voters give developer Stephen Sutherland’s project the nod in

November, he will move forward with plans to build a 110-room luxury

resort on the Balboa Peninsula between 15th and 18th streets. Council

members had not called for a vote by press time Tuesday night.

The land is now occupied by a mobile home park and Las Arenas

Park, but the general plan reserves the land for recreation and open

space.

Residents, including a grass-roots group called Protect Our Parks,

have vehemently opposed the resort, saying a hotel would change the

character of the peninsula and the land should be devoted to public

uses.

“If the city wants a hotel, why don’t we build it and keep all the

profits, Newport Beach resident Robert Walkley said. “I’m not against

development, but I’m against the conversion of public property to

private control.

Council members have said the public should have as much

information as possible before they vote on the project. A report on

the resort’s potential environmental effects and a financial estimate

of what the city would gain have been released. The resort is

projected to net the city $2.2 million in its first year of financial

stability.

Tuesday’s hearing, which was also attended by Sutherland, centered

on whether the environmental report met the guidelines of the

California Environmental Quality Act. City officials have stressed

that the council, by certifying the report, was not voting for or

against the project itself.

“This project has a whole lot of steps to it,” City Atty. Bob

Burnham said. “There’s a whole bundle of things that need to be done

before this project can be implemented.”

Opponents criticized the environmental report because it did not

fully address traffic, parking and other issues, they said.

“The problem is clearly that the process is being rushed along to

meet that election time frame,” Newport Beach resident Matt Webb

said. “I think, at this point, there’s too many unanswered

questions.”

Sutherland said Monday a rejection of the environmental report

would be the end of the line.

“There really isn’t much plan of action; it’s over,” he said,

referring to a rejected report. “I just don’t see any avenue after

that.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers business, politics and the environment.

She may be reached at (949) 764-4330 or by e-mail at

alicia.robinson@latimes.com.