The California Coastal Commission’s local coastal plan (LCP) for Malibu is moving ahead as planned and will be ready for review and comment in the first part of September, according to Chuck Damm, commission senior deputy director.
The LCP will spell out what the city can and cannot do in the way of developing much of its own land, regulating commercial usage along the coastline and even how to control sewage waste. The Coastal Commission was required by law to submit an LCP for Malibu after the commission rejected the city’s own draft plan last year.
The fate of a new and revised Malibu city-drafted LCP, submitted to the Coastal Commission on July 26, is unclear. City Attorney Christi Hogin said it appeared to her that “there is resistance to accepting our plan” by the commission.
The city rushed its plan to completion in the hope its provisions would be considered for inclusion in the commission’s draft. But deputy director Damm, in an Aug. 7 letter to Hogin, listed several requirements that were missing from the LCP submittal.
In essence, Damm’s letter cited failure to include:
- Copies of relevant zoning ordinances and zoning maps.
- Copies of public notices that were sent out prior to the many hearings that were held on the LCP in the past few months, and “speakers’ slips” indicating who participated.
- Supporting documents for environmental impact reports that were submitted.
- An indication of “whether the LCP will take effect immediately upon Coastal Commission approval or will require formal city adoption after commission approval.”
“It was pretty nit-picky … they were basically asking for a copy of our mailing list,” Hogin said. And she speculated the commission was resisting acceptance of the city plan because once it is formally on file, the commission must then begin a 90-day period of hearings and recommendations for changes. In other words, they would be under a time pressure to get their own draft ready for scrutiny.
“I think they’d like to avoid it (the Malibu LCP) altogether. That’s the message,” said Hogin.
But Damm denied any such motive. In fact, in his letter to Hogin, Damm wrote: “Notwithstanding the inadequacy of the city’s submittal for filing, staff will review what was submitted and will incorporate those provisions that are deemed appropriate for inclusion in the LCP” being drafted by the commission. He reaffirmed that commitment in a later interview.
Hogin said the list of missing requirements would be easy to comply with, and that there should be no further cause to delay the LCP’s filing.