It’s an offer from the California Coastal Commission we can’t refuse—that was the reasoning behind a 5-2 vote by the Pacific Grove City Council on Wednesday, Jan. 15, to certify the document that gives the city primary coastal permitting authority for the first time in its history.
No one was happy about all the rules contained within the coastal development plan, called the Local Coastal Program, but a majority of the councilmembers reasoned it was the best deal they were ever going to get.
The debate before the vote that evening was contentious, with a long line of residents from the Asilomar Dunes neighborhood asking the council to delay the vote and figure out a way to amend the plan.
Since the program was developed through negotiations between the city and the commission a few years ago, residents have contended that regulations contained within it will harm their main assets—their homes. Their main worry is that repair or renovation work done on existing homes will at some point trigger having to meet strict rules for square footage of homes and driveways. A homeowner with a two-story home would have to remove the second story to meet height requirements, for example.
Despite heavy opposition from neighbors, Mayor Bill Peake and Councilmember Joe Amelio—the two dissenting “no” votes—the rest of the councilmembers argued that if they didn’t approve the plan by the state’s May 13, 2020 deadline, the city’s coastal zone could face stricter regulations down the line. City Manager Ben Harvey advised the council that either trying to amend the plan or not approving it before the deadline would result in having to resubmit it and start all over again.
Councilmember Cynthia Garfield said she spent four days sitting in on Coastal Commission meetings studying how the staff and commissioners handle other cities and counties and their coastal development plans. “My conclusion was that if we resubmit, what will come back to us will be more punitive and worse,” she said.
“I hear what you are talking about," she said addressing residents, "that it’s not just aggravating, it’s outrageous that we’re not getting listened to. But it’s not because people haven’t tried. There’s been an incredible effort of negotiations of discussions of sending information in and getting nothing back.”
Garfield, along with councilmembers Robert Huitt, Nick Smith, Jenny McAdams and Amy Tomlinson stressed that the city gaining local control over coastal land use decisions now was important to residents and businesses. They also relied on advice from city staff and a consultant that they can submit amendments to the commission up to three times a year.
Peake disagreed. “They [the California Coastal Commission] want the cities to approve their regulations and this is the only time we have any leverage. If we decide no, there’s still some issues, we would like some changes,” he said. “After we’ve approved it that leverage is gone forever.”
“We don’t have leverage,” Garfield replied.