BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2178
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 7, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Wesley Chesbro, Chair
AB 2178 (Jones) - As Introduced: February 23, 2012
SUBJECT : Coastal resources: California Coastal Act of 1976:
coastal development
SUMMARY : Exempts the construction of flagpoles on land or in
water in the coastal zone from the coastal development permit
requirements under the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal
Act).
EXISTING LAW , pursuant to the Coastal Act:
1)Requires a person planning to perform or undertake any
development in the coastal zone to obtain a coastal
development permit from the California Coastal Commission
(Commission) or local government enforcing a Local Coastal
Program (LCP).
2)Defines "development" to mean, among other things, the
placement or erection of any solid material or structure on
land or in water. "Structure" includes, but is not limited
to, any building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, siphon,
aqueduct, telephone line, and electrical power transmission
and distribution line.
3)Defines the "coastal zone" as the land and water area of the
State of California from the Oregon border to the border of
the Republic of Mexico, extending seaward to the state's outer
limit of jurisdiction, including all offshore islands, and
extending inland generally 1,000 yards from the mean high tide
line of the sea. In significant coastal estuarine, habitat,
and recreational areas the coastal zone extends inland to the
first major ridgeline paralleling the sea or five miles from
the mean high tide line of the sea, whichever is less, and in
developed urban areas the zone generally extends inland less
than 1,000 yards. The coastal zone does not include the area
of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission nor any area contiguous thereto,
including any river, stream, tributary, creek, or flood
control or drainage channel flowing into such area.
AB 2178
Page 2
4)Authorizes the Commission's executive director to issue
waivers from coastal development permit requirements for any
development that is de minimis. A proposed development is de
minimis if the executive director determines that it involves
no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or
cumulatively, on coastal resources and that it will be
consistent with the policies of the Commission.
THIS BILL :
1)Excludes the construction or erection of a flagpole on land or
water in the coastal zone from the meaning of "structure"
under the Coastal Act.
2)Prohibits a determination that a flagpole on land or water in
the coastal zone adversely impacts the scenic or visual
qualities of coastal areas.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill. According to the author:
The construction or erection of a flag pole within the
Coastal Zone is determined to be a 'new development'
�under the Coastal Act]. Thus, in order to legally
construct or erect something as inconsequential as a
flag pole, private property owners must acquire a
Coastal Permit from the Coastal Commission?.This bill
would clarify that the term 'structure' does not
include the construction or erection of a flagpole on
land or water in the coastal zone. The bill would also
prohibit the construction or erection of a flagpole on
land or water in the coastal zone from being
determined to adversely impact the scenic or visual
qualities of coastal areas.
2)Commission's Response. In response to the issues raised by
this bill, the Commission provided the following information:
Like every other type of development in the coastal
zone, flagpole placement may have impacts on coastal
resources that must be evaluated on a site-specific
basis. The Commission's regulatory and enforcement
AB 2178
Page 3
record on flagpoles reflects this. For instance, in
1992, the Commission issued a de minimis waiver for a
70-foot flagpole in Crescent City with a concrete and
tamped sand foundation (1-02-024-W). In 2009, the
city of Rancho Palos Verdes approved a 70-foot high
flag pole at the Trump National Golf Course despite a
16-foot height restriction in the city's certified
LCP. The project is within the Commission's appeal
jurisdiction, and was conditioned upon Commission
approval. The Commission has not yet acted on this
permit item. In 2010, the Commission resolved a
violation concerning the placement of a flag pole in
an environmentally sensitive habitat area in a deed
restricted area protected by an open space easement.
The flag pole was removed as soon as the violation was
discovered. In other situations, flag poles have
qualified as exempt improvements to existing
structures.
3)Unintended Consequences. While in most cases a flagpole may
be "inconsequential" (as the author states), there may be
cases when a flagpole does have negative consequences. For
example, what if a flagpole is erected on water and impacts
sensitive habitat, boating, or water-related activities? What
if a person clutters his/her entire property with flagpoles
and blocks important coastal views? What if a
publicity-seeker wants to build the tallest flagpole in the
world? Currently, one of the tallest flagpoles is located in
North Korea and has a height of 525 feet and flies a 600 pound
North Korean flag. This bill would allow for these types of
developments without a coastal development permit.
As indicated above in the Commission's response, the
Commission has several mechanisms, including de minimis
waivers and exemptions, that should apply to most flagpoles.
A coastal development permit, however, seems appropriate in
the rare case involving a flagpole that has the potential to
adversely affect, either individually or cumulatively, the
state's coastal resources.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
AB 2178
Page 4
None on file
Opposition
California CoastalCommission
Sierra Club California
Analysis Prepared by : Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092