Ecological study must pass vote

Alicia Robinson

City leaders will hold a key vote in less than two weeks on the

much-contested Marinapark resort, which still has to survive a series

of hearings and a public vote before the resort could be built.

City Council members will vote July 27 on whether to certify the

environmental impact report for the proposed 110-room Marinapark

resort project and whether to put a general plan amendment on the

November ballot that’s needed to allow the project.

Certifying the environmental report does not constitute an

approval of the project itself; it merely means the council believes

the report meets California Environmental Quality Act guidelines,

City Attorney Bob Burnham said.

A previous agreement with developer Sutherland Talla Hospitality

requires the council to put the project before voters once the

environmental report is approved.

Burnham also will present for the council’s approval a proposal

detailing the economic terms and obligations in the 50-year lease the

city would grant the developer for the Marinapark property.

One important change that came to light Tuesday is that Stephen

Sutherland will develop the project with Bayside Pacific LLC. Los

Angeles businessman D. Michael Talla, who was a party to the city’s

original contract for the project, has withdrawn and will not be

involved.

“He has invested in probably 100 businesses across the country and

I found out about one that I did not feel comfortable with,”

Sutherland said. “He volunteered to withdraw from this project.”

If the resort project gets on the ballot and voters approve it,

developers must apply for various city permits and get planning

commission and council approval for project plans.

Residents who oppose the resort want the council to reject the

environmental report because they don’t think it fully addresses

issues, such as traffic and parking. They are also concerned because

some of the hotel rooms would be sold as timeshares. Many residents

want the property to become a park.

“We felt that it was just [incredible] and ridiculous that the

[environmental] study took a position that a hotel development could

be a superior environmental alternative to a public park,” said Tom

Billings, a spokesman for a recently-formed group Protect Our Parks,

which is fighting Marinapark. “Right there we lost a lot of

confidence in the whole [environmental impact report] process.”

For Sutherland, a lot hinges on the council’s upcoming vote.

“This is kind of the starting line. It’s taken six years to get to

the starting line,” he said. “It comes down to one night now.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers business, politics and the environment.

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

[email protected].