Coaster May Be on a Roll as Council Vests Landmark

Elated supporters of the Giant Dipper roller coaster said that the Mission Beach landmark would be in operation by May, 1989, after the City Council removed a major hurdle Tuesday for the operator.

Council members voted to allow the Belmont Park coaster to be operated commercially after it is restored and then voted to extend “vested rights” to the Giant Dipper.

Councilman Bruce Henderson forced the vesting issue to a vote despite stiff opposition from Mayor Maureen O’Connor, who said the vote would ease the way for park developers to gain the go-ahead on their commercial project.

By declaring it vested, the council made the roller coaster exempt from the provisions of Proposition G, which was passed by the voters in November and calls for Belmont Park and the surrounding area to be set aside for park uses. However, the measure excludes any development that has a “vested right” in the property, and lays out conditions for establishing that right.

Henderson argued that the coaster had a vested right based on the fact that it has been at the same location for more than 50 years. He argued that the language in Proposition G made it clear that the coaster was exempt from the measure. O’Connor had asked the city attorney to offer an opinion as to whether the coaster was exempt, but attorneys for the city could not agree on the initiative’s intentions.

Issue Hotly Debated

“You will note that no definite conclusion was reached by this office with regard to the question of whether or not the roller coaster is specifically exempt under the initiative,” said a report from City Attorney John W. Witt.

O’Connor tried unsuccessfully to have the vesting issue discussed next month, when the council debates whether the Belmont Park development of shops and the restoration of the Plunge should be vested. The issue was hotly debated by the council on Monday, but further action was delayed until April 18.

“You can grant them the right to go ahead commercially without vesting (the roller coaster),” O’Connor said. “By making the decision today on the roller coaster, you (also) make the decision on Belmont Park.”

The mayor pointed out that the roller coaster does not have a building permit, but the Belmont Park development does. O’Connor said that vesting the roller coaster will give additional ammunition to the park’s developers, who will argue that they also have a right to be vested since they have the required building permits from the city.

O’Connor and Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer oppose the park’s development, which is being done by Belmont Park Associates. On Tuesday, Councilman Bob Filner joined O’Connor and Wolfsheimer in voting against vesting for the roller coaster.

After the vote, an angry O’Connor told Henderson that she would bet him a nickel that he would probably vote to vest the Belmont Park development, since he voted to vest the roller coaster.

Henderson coolly answered no, prompting O’Connor to ask him if he really was going to vote against vesting the development. Henderson replied yes.

“I doubt it,” snapped O’Connor, who abruptly ended the discussion.

Norm Starr, president of Save the Coaster Committee, said the coaster will be operating before the summer of 1989. According to Starr, an operator from Santa Cruz is ready to commit $1.4 million to finish renovating the giant coaster. The operator was waiting for the project to be vested, Starr said.