First half of land-use plan approved

The city of Newport Beach on Thursday overcame one huge hurdle in

creating a state-required local coastal plan, but the work isn’t over

yet.

The California Coastal Commission unanimously approved the

land-use portion of Newport Beach’s local coastal plan at a Thursday

meeting in San Diego. Environmentalists cheered the decision because

the commission agreed with its staff rather than the city on two

disputed items -- how to define wetlands and how far to set back

buildings from coastal bluffs.

“We accepted those modifications,” Newport Beach Assistant City

Manager Sharon Wood said. “We studied them some more and decided that

it’s something we can live with.”

As the commission approved it, the plan will require buildings on

coastal bluffs in Dover Shores, Shorecliffs and other neighborhoods

to be set back 25 feet from the bluff’s edge. The city wanted to use

the setbacks of existing development as a guide rather than a strict

25 feet.

But the 25-foot rule won’t be absolute.

“People can apply for exceptions to it, which the Coastal

Commission itself has approved,” Wood said.

The city and the commission also disagreed on what to do if it’s

not clear whether a piece of land qualifies as a wetland. The

commission rejected the city’s request to consider regulations from

other environmental agencies when there’s a question over whether

something is a wetland.

Newport Beach environmental activist Jan Vandersloot said he’s

glad the two sides came to an agreement on the coastal land use plan.

The changes the city wanted would have weakened environmental

protections along the coast, he said.

“If the city had been able to modify how wetlands ... and coastal

bluffs were defined, then that would set a really bad precedent for

the rest of the state,” he said.

“They won’t be able to do more aggressive chopping into or down

the sides of coastal bluffs, which is what the city was trying to

do.”

Wood said the city wasn’t trying to weaken coastal protections but

to avoid creating a policy that would require many exceptions, which

the commission now ends up considering.

“What we wanted to do was say it up front rather than writing a

policy that we knew wouldn’t apply in certain cases,” she said.

The City Council now has six months to decide whether to adopt the

land-use plan as the commission approved it. If that happens, the

city will create rules to enforce what’s in the land-use plan and

rules for how people can apply for exceptions to it.

The commission also must approve the enforcement portion, a

process Wood said could take more than a year.

When both halves of the plan are approved, the city can take over

granting some coastal development permits that now must come from the

Coastal Commission.

Vandersloot said he’s happy with Thursday’s decision, but he’ll

stay involved to make sure the enforcement regulations uphold the

environmental protections promised in the land use plan.

QUESTION

Is the Coastal Commission’s land-use plan too strict? Call our

Readers Hotline at (714) 966-4664 or send e-mail to

o7dailypilot@latimes.com. f7Please spell your name and tell us your

hometown and phone numbers for verification purposes only.

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers government and politics. She may be

reached at (714) 966-4626 or by e-mail at

o7alicia.robinson@latimes.comf7.