CPOA-SC will have a virtual conference call with Kathy Molloy & David Carlson of Santa Cruz Planning Dept to discuss proposed changes in the LCD and Code Amendments on 8/19/20
CPOA-SC and representatives from Pajaro Dunes are confirmed for a virtual conference call on Wednesday August 19, 2020 at 4 p.m. to review the proposed changes to the County LCP. CPOA’s proposed revisions incorporate changes necessary to clarify that the so called...COASTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE MAJOR AMENDMENT NO. LCP-5-SCL-18-0099-1 (1-18, MAJOR REMODEL DEFINITION) for Commission Meeting of August 13, 2020
Again the CA Coastal Commission is asserting a definition of major Redevelopment/Remodeling “Major Remodel” clearly indicates how to calculate the 50% replacement threshold for purposes of determining when such structures must be considered “redevelopment” or “new” development. Additionally, it indicates that changes to individual major structural components are cumulative over time from January 1,1977, when regulations requiring Coastal Development Permits (CDPs) were implemented. Therefore all major structural alterations or replacements since the Coastal Act was implemented on January 1, 1977, would be considered by the CCC as a “New” structure and subject to the new requirements. CPOA believes this position by the CCC is not legally defensible, and many Coastal Counties and Cities have proposed different definitions of “New” development. For example, in the Santa Cruz County proposed LCP, a “new” development is defined as any major Redevelopment or Replacement of more than 50% of the major structural components, on or after the amended LCP is adopted (January 1, 2021). The CCC is scheduled to vote on San Clemente’s LCP on 8/13/20.
FOWLER PACKING COMPANY et al. v COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
Petitioners are five property owners with a private driveway easement on Geoffrey Drive,
Santa Cruz, located on a bluff above Twin Lakes State Beach. Petitioners challenge the Coastal
Commission’s jurisdiction to (1) reverse the County’s exemption determination on their
application for a Development Permit to install a gate and fence on their easement; (2) require
Petitioners to either remove the gate and fence or apply for a Coastal Development Permit
(CDP); and (3) impose civil penalties if Plaintiffs refuse to remove the gate and fence to allow
public access to Twin Lakes State Beach. The CA Superior Court ruled that the CA Coastal Commission does not have the authority to impose unreasonable fines and fees to an approved application for Coastal Development Permit, after it has been approved by Santa Cruz County in accordance to it’s approved Local Coastal Plan.
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors to post-pone hearing on LCP until 9/1/20
Board of Supervisors to delay public hearing on the proposed Public Safety and Hazard Mgmt General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and County Code Amendments until 9/1/20. Staff report and recommendations should be available by 8/27/20. CPOA plans to meet with Kathy Molloy and David Carlson to review the revisions to the LCP before it is finalized
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors to may delay vote on LCP until December 2020
CPOA has continued to lobby the County of Santa Cruz for changes in the proposed Local Coastal Plan section 6.4 (Coastal Bluffs & Beaches) and implementation plan (“IP”) chapter 16.10 (Geologic Hazards) regarding the “one time only limitation” on major redevelopment/replacement structures along the coastline. According to Supervisor John Leopold, the Planning Department has asked to delay any action until December 2020. Supervisor Leopold has met with County Counsel, Kathy Molloy – Director of the Planning Department, and Carlos Palacios – County Executive Director, to make the language changes pursuant to his approved motion at the Board of Supervisor’s meeting on 3/10/20. Hopefully, these changes will be made soon and the revised LCP will be presented to the Board of Supervisors by the end of the Summer.
New Bill Would Let Coastal Homeowners Make Improvements to Prevent Bluff Collapse
The legislation (SB 1090) presented by Sen. Patricia Bates, a Republican from Laguna Niguel, to the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee in Sacramento would obligate public agencies and private owners of seafront property in San Diego and Orange Counties to mitigate coastal erosion.
SB 1090 would require the Coastal Commission to review and approve a public agency’s or homeowner’s application for erosion-mitigation efforts in regard to planting, drainage and seawall or other reinforcing structures. Approved applicants also would have to pay for the costs of sand replenishment and permit processing.
As California beaches reopen, seawall construction becomes legislative battleground
Homeowners fighting sea level rise say going to the Coastal Commission for any form of protection has increasingly become a non-starter. This new legislation (SB 1090), supporters say, would streamline a frustrating permitting process that could ultimately save lives. They point to the bluff collapse in Encinitas last summer that killed three women.
Santa Cruz County Planning Dept Public Hearing 5/27/20 @ 9:30 a.m. on Short Term Vacation Rental Policies during COVID-19
Public Hearing to review and provide recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on proposed amendments to the county code regarding the use of Short Term Vacation Rentals during COVID-19 pandemic. For more information on the remote Public Hearing contact Michael Lam at (831) 454-3371 or Project Planner – Jocelyn Drake at (831) 454-3127.
SB-1090 Coastal erosion: installation of shoreline protective devices: application process.(2019-2020)
CA bill will amend the application process for shoreline protection devices for Orange and San Diego Counties, to limit Sand Mitigation Fees to $25,000 per parcel or 1% of assessed value, and outlines an appeal process for denied applications. If passed, it is unclear if this bill will affect other Counties.