Coastal ruling affects thousands of projects

St. Catherine of Siena Catholic School may face yet another hurdle in its quest to improve the school campus.

The California Coastal Commission on Oct. 12 overruled the city and decided that a not-yet-issued city coastal development permit for the proposed project can be appealed to the commission.

The school has experienced a torrent of stumbling blocks in its plans, from irregularities in neighborhood noticing, to endangered species, to stop-work orders.

The Coastal Commission decided that the presence of a drainage course near the property rendered a city-issued permit appealable.

City and school officials are warning that the decision could open the door to many other appeals of such permits in Laguna Beach.

The city issues coastal development permits, but under certain circumstances they can be appealed to the Coastal Commission.

The Commission decided that the school project could be appealed to them after determining that any drainage course is a stream as defined in the California Coastal Act and can therefore serve as the basis of an appeal.

City Manager Ken Frank took exception to the decision in a strongly worded letter.

Frank said the city’s topography of hills and gullies would leave a property owner in limbo until the commission staff made a site visit and rendered an opinion on the project’s appealability.

In an Oct. 6 letter to the commission, Frank said that the city “strongly disagrees” with the decision to allow an appeal of the St. Catherine project.

“It has significant ramifications for the entire city, increasing the number of parcels subject to appeal from about 540 to about 2,340,” Frank wrote.

“Your Commission’s decision has ramifications far beyond just this one project. Adopting the proposed interpretation would throw the appeals process into chaos.”

The appealability issue was raised by Lisa Marks, a local resident and an appointed member of the city’s Environmental Committee, who wrote to the commission on Aug. 21, a few weeks after the project’s city-issued permits were nullified by the City Council due to irregularities in noticing of the neighborhood.

“There is a significant watercourse adjacent to the property and within 100 feet,” Marks wrote.

“One of the proposed buildings is approximately 10 feet closer to the watercourse. Therefore, the project is ‘appealable.’”

Marks has criticized city officials for their handling of environmental issues.

“Laguna Beach can’t be counted upon to enforce the Local Coastal Plan,” Marks said.

Community Development Director John Montgomery also argued against appealability.

“Is it the intention of the Coastal Commission to have the entire city be a potential appealable area driven by calls made to Coastal staff?” Montgomery wrote to the commission.

But no appeal can be made to the commission until the project has completed the city’s rocesses.

At its July 12 meeting, the Planning Commission had approved the coastal permit as part of the school’s plan to demolish its existing 25,000-square-foot facility and construct a new 42,000-square-foot facility on the 6½-acre site. The permits were nullified by the City Council after irregularities were discovered in the notification process.

After the permits were nullified in August, the discovery of an endangered bird, the gnatcatcher, near the site necessitated environmental studies which must be completed before the new hearing can take place.

A Planning Commission hearing was scheduled for Nov. 15, but the school has been advised that the hearing will be continued to allow more time to gather information about fuel modification from the Fire Department, school spokeswoman Julia Kelly said.

The school’s principal, Pat Prerost, said that the “arbitrary assertion of jurisdiction on a drainage course greatly impacts our ability to create a suitable learning environment for our students and it will complicate and extend the permit approval process for thousands of property owners in Laguna Beach.”

The commission did not designate that drainage courses like those found on the site were reasons for appealability when the city’s Appeal Jurisdiction Map was first certified by the commission.

Any area not found on the map is under the jurisdiction of the city, not the commission.

The revised definition of the word “stream” has become a hotbed of contention between city and state officials.

The new definition “seriously undermines the authority that was delegated to the city” at the time, said the school’s land use attorney Allen Haynie of Latham & Hawkins.

-----------------------------------------------------

QUESTION OF THE WEEK

Should the Coastal Commission have the final say on development of properties with watercourses? Write us at P.O. Box 248, Laguna Beach, CA, 92652, e-mail us at coastlinepilot@latimes.com or fax us at 494-8979. Please give your name and tell us your home address and phone number for verification purposes only.