HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04171990 - 2.8 .4Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon �'aCourlty
°Srq KT'.
Director of Community Development
DATE: April 12, 1990
SUBJECT: Referral on Foster City Letter - BCDC Legislation
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Endorse, in concept, an amendment to the McAteer-Petris Act
allowing BCDC to deny new projects within its 100 foot
shoreline band jurisdiction which do not meet the Commission.' s
standards for either sea level vige or seismic safety.
2. Continue to monitor the proposed legislation and
administrative procedures to ensure that the legislation and
standards allow for flexibility in interpretation and that
they don' t become onerous to local agencies.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impacts on the County.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
BCDC staff has proposed to its Commission that State legislation be
. modified to allow BCDC to deny projects within their 100 foot
shoreline jurisdictional band if the projects don' t adequately
account for sea level rise or provide for seismic safety
provisions.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATUR .
aq�e—
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OFrB COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD .ON April 17, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
cc: Community Development ATTESTED -46-kly i!', /990
CAO P IH L BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
County Counsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Public Works AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
Some jurisdictions oppose these additional reasons for BCDC project
denial because it could override home rule. They are further
concerned that until the standards suggested by this legislation are
known that this legislation should be opposed. They fear that these
standards could become onerous on local government and for project
applicants.
On the other side of this issue and the long range planning concerns
raised by the October 17, 1989 earthquake and the policy: issues
relating to the sea level rise which has been measured in parts of
the Bay Area. This is a concern without even taking in
consideration of the "greenhouse effect" .
The intent of this proposed legislation, is to allow the commission
to consider these factors in review of applications; it doesn' t
force a conclusion on the merits of any application.
When balancing the issue of home rule against further review of
public safety concerns such as sea level rise or seismic safety,
staff can support the sharing of such power with BCDC. Local
governments will be considering these issues in their approval
process.
The provision of regional expertise in these matters also may be
helpful to local governments ultimately.
Staff recommends that this legislation be supported in concept, but
that we monitor the legislation and the development of standards to
ensure that are workable and balance all public purposes for use
along the Bay.
We will keep your Board informed should the circumstances change in
the wording of the law or the development of standards.
JWC:vpl
cjc8/bcdc.bos