SB 676 would make legislative findings and declarations that the California Coastal Commission should not require any applicant who applies for a coastal development permit for a project that is proposed to be located in the coastal zone to perform any mitigation measures as a condition of obtaining the permit if mitigation measures would apply to an area outside of the county in which the project is proposed to be located.
History and Sponsorship: According to the author’s staff, this bill arises from the proposed mitigation requirements of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station project.
Existing Law: The Coastal Act requires that any permit issued, or any development or action approved on appeal, be subject to reasonable terms and conditions in order to ensure that such development or action will be in accordance with the provisions of the Coastal Act. Where any dike and fill development is permitted in wetlands, mitigation measures shall include, at a minimum, either acquisition of equivalent areas of equal or greater biological productivity or opening up equivalent areas to tidal action; provided, however, that if no appropriate restoration site is available, an in-lieu fee sufficient to provide an area of equivalent productive value or surface areas shall be dedicated to an appropriate public agency, or the replacement site shall be purchased before the dike or fill development may proceed. (Public Resources Code Sections 30607 and 30607.1)
This Bill: This bill would make legislative findings and declarations that the Coastal Commission should not require any applicant who applies for a coastal development permit to perform any mitigation measures as a condition of obtaining the permit if mitigation measures would apply to an area outside of the county in which the project is proposed to be located.
Discussion: The Coastal Commission looks at proposed mitigation requirements on a project by project basis, first looking to mitigate adverse impacts of development on site, and then looking to other possible sites for in kind mitigation. In a few instances, the closest feasible wetland mitigation site may not be within borders of the county in which a project is permitted.
While this bill’s provisions are not binding on the Commission, it is not good public policy to restrict the Commission from requiring mitigation as a condition of development for a project solely because mitigation opportunities do not lie within the county that the project is located.
None
Staff recommends that the Commission OPPOSE SB 676. (Adopted 4/10/97)
For more information contact Jeff Stump, Legislative Coordinator, at (916) 445-6067.
Back to the Legislative Office