Following extensive public debate and back and forth between the county and the California Coastal Commission over the past five years, the Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved a group of amendments to the 1982 Local Coastal Program related to land use, accepting many of the commission’s significant modifications. Yet the approval of the amendments—which concern agriculture, community zoning, biological resources and more—will not go into effect until the county and the commission reach an agreement on a contentious final section related to environmental hazards.
Due to continued disputes with the county and input from the public, the commission delayed a vote on the environmental hazards chapter—which details the ground rules for future development in areas affected by sea-level rise, floods and slides—last November, when it certified the other parts of the amended L.C.P.
The commission has repeatedly submitted modifications to the language, which the county has primarily incorporated.
While last week, board members rubberstamped the land use amendments that do not pertain to environmental hazards, they deferred action on another group of amendments related to implementation that were certified by the commission in November.
This decision followed the recommendation of county staff, who expressed ongoing concern with the commission’s proposed language. “We want to move ahead just like everyone else,” Tom Lai, assistant director for the Marin Community Development Agency, said of delaying approval of the implementation program amendments. “But if the board accepts the changes, you’re putting your staff in a box we might not be able to get out of later on.”
The county has a final deadline of May 1, 2018 to accept or reject the commission’s recommendations.
Remaining sticking points for the county regarding the implementation amendments include uncertainty around the status of structures and lots that predate the Coastal Act, the categorization of piers as shoreline protective devices and whether the commission’s proposed regulation of private wells exceeds the purpose of the Coastal Act.
Nancy Cave, the commission’s North Central district manager, encouraged supervisors to approve both the land use and implementation amendments, saying the remaining issues raised by the county were minor and easily resolvable. She also said there would be another opportunity for the county to make revisions, once the environmental hazards section is completed.
Ms. Cave emphasized that the commission and the county should focus their attention on the environmental hazards section, a sentiment that was echoed by multiple representatives from the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin and the Turtle Island Restoration Network during public comments.
But residents, local business owners and farmers spoke out in support of the county resolving the remaining issues before moving ahead, which supported the board’s ultimate decision; a representative for the Sierra Club was the only person to suggest the county not approve anything. Although he motioned for the approval, District Four Supervisor Dennis Rodoni was particularly troubled about the timeline. “Being new to this, I’ve already felt some of the frustration you have all felt in the audience,” he said.
Mr. Lai replied that he hopes the county can bring a set of amendments regarding the environmental hazards back to the board for approval at a July 11 board meeting, after which the commission staff will have until Sept. 29 to bring forward their recommendations.
Although Ms. Cave said the deadline was tight, especially considering the time necessary to provide opportunity for public input, both commission and county staff expressed a willingness for collaboration and compromise, and a desire to meet the May 2018 backstop to finalize the entire L.C.P.