AB 1129 – Coastal Access and Preservation Act

From ActCoastal

Month May
Year 2017
Summary This bill would amend PRC 30235 to define “existing structure” as structures built prior to January 1, 1977, and to specify that shoreline protection devices must be approved consistent with the Coastal Act policies protecting public access, shoreline ecology, natural landforms and other impacts on coastal resources. The bill would specify that emergency permits issued for shoreline protective devices are intended to allow the minimum amount of temporary development necessary to address the emergency situation. The bill would also amend PRC 30821 to allow for the imposition of administrative penalties for unpermitted shoreline protective devices.

Staff recommended support of the bill and the need for close analysis of seawalls, especially given the extremely pressing issue of sea level rise and the need to appropriately address its impacts while preserving public resources.

Commissioners approved support of the bill on a vote of 11-1.

Outcome Green Dot.png
Outcome Description The California Coastal Protection Network (CCPN), , testified in support of the bill on behalf of the Nature Conservancy, the bill’ sponsor. CCPN also requested Coastal Commission support for the bill.

Commissioner Brownsey expressed concern for calling out seawalls specifically as eligible for administrative penalties and leaving out other equally important subject matters. Enforcement staff responded that the bill’s language intends to clarifying existing law in order to make it easier to move forward.

Commissioner Carole Groom made a motion to support the bill and was seconded by Commissioner Aaron Peskin. Commissioner Erik Howell spoke against the bill stating that he is concerned that this will discourage seawalls that may bring public benefits.

Ultimately, commissioners voted to support the bill 11-1.

Why You Should Care AB 1129 would help the Commission better enforce existing laws by allowing for penalties and fines for illegal development, including shoreline protective structures. The measure also ensures that emergency permits for any coastal development include a plan for removal. Coastal armoring fixes the shore in place and lead to loss of public beaches and can have detrimental impacts to shoreline habitat. Given impending impacts from sea level rise, all shoreline protective devices should receive extremely careful analysis.
Image Strands point sand loss nexus (1).jpg
Decision Type Bill Support
Staff Recommendation Support
Staff Report
Opposition to Project
Coastal Act Policies Chapter 3

Voting Detail for AB 1129 – Coastal Access and Preservation Act

Individual vote detail for Issue: AB 1129 – Coastal Access and Preservation Act
Donne BrownseyGood Vote
Mark VargasGood Vote
Greg CoxGood Vote
Effie Turnbull-SandersGood Vote
Mary K. ShallenbergerGood Vote
Dayna BochcoGood Vote
Ryan SundbergGood Vote
Mary LuevanoGood Vote
Aaron PeskinGood Vote
Roberto UrangaGood Vote
Erik HowellBad Vote
Carole GroomGood Vote

Meeting Page

View Meeting Page for the meeting where this issue was discussed/voted on.