Two state Coastal Commission members have filed an appeal of a condominium/hotel project approved by the Grover Beach City Council for the corner of Highway 1 and West Grand Avenue.

In their appeal, commission Chairman Patrick Kruer and April Vargas, the alternate for Commissioner Sara Wan, claim the project is not an allowable use for the site and encroaches on environmentally sensitive habitat with no definite mitigation plan.

They also claim the project does not adequately address potential impacts on marine resources and coastal water quality, will block scenic views, is out of character with the community, and fails to include an analysis of its impacts on city services.

Commissioners are scheduled to determine whether the appeal raises substantial issues when the panel meets Nov. 16 in San Diego.

If commissioners determine substantial issues have been raised with regard to Grover Beach's Local Coastal Plan, which the commission staff is recommending, the commission could take jurisdiction over the coastal-development permit for the project.

The 20-unit hotel/condominium project, which contains five first-floor retail spaces, including one space for a cafe, and a 37-space underground parking garage, was approved Sept. 17 on a 3-2 vote.

“It is our position we did an adequate job of reviewing all of the requirements that were within our responsibility to review, and we will forward all of that information to the Coastal Commission to help them make their decision,” said Robert Perrault, Grover Beach city manager.

Advertisement

Perrault said the city probably will not send a representative to the hearing because it is being held in San Diego.

“This (hearing) is pretty much the threshold step in a process,” he added.

The project is being developed by IGIT Inc., a family-owned construction and development company in Grover Beach that formerly operated as Cobalt Construction.

Ron Perkins, chief executive officer of IGIT, said he was “not surprised at all” by the appeal.

“It didn't really alarm us,” Perkins said. “We knew there was a 90-percent chance it would be appealed when we made the application two years ago.”

He said the commissioners like to review almost every project like this that comes before the panel.

“With the California coast, people are concerned with doing everything right,” Perkins said. “We really feel it's just a matter of the mechanics of the Coastal Commission, the way they work.”

He added that many of the issues the commission is bringing up are “city issues,” and the city is sending a letter explaining its position on those.

“We thought we built it within the guidelines,” he said. “We definitely didn't want to build a pink elephant down there.”

He also noted IGIT sent its entire team up to meet with the Coastal Commission staff a year and a half ago, then made a number changes to the project the staff suggested.

“Quite frankly, it was a benefit,” he said, explaining the changes improved the project.

“The questions they're bringing up, we think we can answer and make them understand the project a little better,” he said. “We're optimistic. We're not going anywhere. If it takes 10 years (to complete the project), we'll keep going.”

However the Coastal Commission staff report concludes the project “appears to result in overdevelopment of a sensitive ‘gateway' site adjacent to Meadow Creek (environmentally sensitive habitat area) along Highway 1, with a use that is not allowed under the LCP ... .”

It also says the project is “not conducive to fostering public access and recreation through visitor-serving amenities, including lower-cost visitor-serving amenities ... .”

The commissioners who filed the appeal raised five issues:

First is that mixed-use developments combining dwelling units - privately owned condominiums - with commercial uses are not permitted within the LCP's coastal planned commercial zoning district.

Second is that the city used the wrong demarcation line for determining the setback from the Meadow Creek environmentally sensitive habitat area, so the project extends into that area.

In addition, impacts to the creek and its riparian corridor have not been avoided or mitigated.

Third is that the plan is not clear on what water-quality protection measures are in place nor whether the project can adequately filter and treat runoff.

Fourth is that the project is too large, dense, massive and intense at the location, which is a gateway to Pismo State Beach and the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area.

Fifth is that the city's approval does not contain an analysis of the project's anticipated demands on public services such as water and sewer service.

Coastal hearing

The California Coastal Commission will meet Nov. 14 to 16 at the Sheraton San Diego Hotel, 1433 Camino Del Rio South, San Diego.

The hearing on the appeal of the Grover Beach condominium/

hotel will be held during the Nov. 16 session, which begins at

8 a.m.

Only the project applicant, people who commented on

the project before the Grover Beach City Council and city

representatives may testify at the hearing; however, the general public may submit written comments.

Written comments must be received by the commission by Friday, Nov. 9, should include the writer's name and should

indicate that the comments refer to Item F11c.

Comments should be mailed to the California Coastal

Commission, 45 Fremont St., Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94105-2219.

For more information, visit www.coastal.ca.gov.

November 8, 2007