Welcome to the Santa Cruz Group News, a monthly update from the Santa Cruz Group of the Sierra Club. We present articles about issues that the leadership of our six standing committees (Climate, Conservation, Executive, Outreach/Events, Political, Transportation) would like to share, along with occasional items from our events calendar. We look forward to staying in touch with you through this newsletter.
IN THIS ISSUE
• Early Spring Flowers at Nisene Marks
• Sierra Club California Opposes Aptos Bluff Project Approval • Santa Cruz Group Issues Committees
Early Spring Flowers at Nisene Marks
Fetid Adder's Tongue. Photograph courtesy of Steve Bakaley.
Milkmaids. Photograph courtesy of Steve Bakaley.
Sierra Club California Opposes Aptos Bluff Project Approval
In a stunning display of administrative non-compliance, the Santa Cruz County Planning Commission approved a shoreline protection structure along an Aptos coastal bluff despite not having any showing of compliance to numerous code requirements. This despite a vehement recommendation of denial from the County Planning Department. In fact, the project had already been denied three times, in accord with staff recommendations of denial, but appealed each time by the project's applicant.
The project in question was a 110 linear foot pin pier retaining wall at the top of a coastal bluff above Beach Drive in Aptos. Although such a project could be an approvable project, it would only be so if it was intended to protect an existing structure from a significant threat, then it must be placed as possible to the development requiring protection. Further, there must be an alternatives analysis of all reasonable alternatives to such structures, and lastly coastal resource impacts must be analyzed and mitigated.
The project was denied by the Zoning Administrator, appealed by the Applicant to the Planning Commission and then denied, appealed again by the Applicant to the Board of Supervisors, who then sent it back down to the Zoning Administrator for re-hearing. It was again denied by the Zoning Administrator, the appealed again by the Applicant up to the Planning Commission. At each stage the Santa Cruz County Planning Department recommended denial. But the Planning Commission then approved it.
The main issue here is that there was no evidence in the record, at all, of which existing structure the shoreline protection structure was meant to protect, and if that "existing" structure qualified as such under the Coastal Act. The record, through engineering reports, was clear that the applicant's home was not under threat. This lack of conformance to code was repeatedly pointed out, but no identification of an existing structure under threat ever entered the record.
Also, no assessment of impacts, nor any proposed mitigation of those impacts, was ever done. It was for these reasons that the County Planning staff was repeatedly recommending denial. Nonetheless, the project was approved.
The proposed project site as seen from below.
The Sierra Club letter stated that the "application was approved by the Santa Cruz County Planning Commission despite clear non-compliance to the Santa Cruz County LCP and ordinances." And further that the "Sierra Club believes in the importance of compliance with regard to coastal development. A situation such as seen with the present application, where conditions for approval have so clearly not been met, must be rectified."
Of note is that there seemed to be a path to addressing the safety concerns this location presented, but that the applicant steadfastly refused to comply with the various code requirements, and to submit required application parts.
The California Coastal Commission determined that this approval raised a substantial issue regarding consistency with the certified Santa Cruz County Local Coastal Program at its February meeting, and has now scheduled a permit hearing at its March 15 meeting, with a staff recommendation of denial.
The Sierra Club California letter submitted to the California Coastal Commission for the February substantial issue determination made a point to "commend the staff of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department, which repeatedly recommended this project for denial at all phases of the County level process."
Santa Cruz Group Issues Committee
Conservation Committeeworks on habitat conservation, monitors logging activities, reviews development projects, and participates in creation and modification of parks master plans, and city and county general and local coastal plans. Contact: Chair Mike Guthmguth@guthpatents.com
Transportation Committeereviews transportation projects within the Cities and County, supports public spending on increased Metro service with bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and large-scale bicycle and pedestrian projects. Contact: Chair Rick Longinottiricklonginotti@gmail.com
Climate Committeeworks to promote State and local Sierra Club climate change policies to help build a sustainable future, free of fossil fuels. Approaches include support for renewable and alternative energy, energy conservation, and increasing carbon sequestration, as well as providing opportunities for members, students, and the general public to expand their understanding of climate change. Contact: Mike Guthmguth@guthpatents.com
Political Committeemakes endorsements of candidates and ballot measures during election years. Contact: Chair Micah Posnermicahposner@cruzio.com
Who We Are
We are the Santa Cruz Group of the Ventana Chapter of the Sierra Club, the world's oldest, largest, and most influential grassroots environmental organization. With over 3.8 million members and supporters, the Sierra Club has the resources to empower people and to influence public policy through community activism, public education, lobbying, and litigation.
Our mission is to Explore, Enjoy and Protect the Planet.
