Reform of the Coastal Protection Act can restore balance between housing and the environment – ​​Marin Independent Journal

It limits oil drilling that threatens to endanger our planet’s climate and pollute our shoreline. It prevents the paving of stunningly beautiful rural coastal areas. It protects threatened wetlands and other sensitive habitats. It expands public access to the coast despite fierce opposition from some of the country’s wealthiest landowners.

The urban aspects of the Coastal Act, however, have all too often failed. The end result: extraordinarily expensive housing along the coast, suburban sprawl into the hottest regions of the state, a transportation system along the coast that is almost entirely dependent on automobiles, and excruciatingly long commutes for workers who cannot afford to live near their employers.

This tension has built over time and in recent years has led to intense debate about reforms in the Capitol and elsewhere.

In addition to strict protections for habitat, open space and agricultural land, the law requires concentrating new construction in urbanized areas, minimizing energy use and automobile traffic, and promoting public transportation, pedestrian and bicycle paths. It states that concentrating construction in urban areas protects coastal resources better overall than concentrating on preserving specific resources.

The Coastal Act envisions compact cities that meet the social and economic needs of the state while living in harmony with the surrounding rural areas and the environmental health of the state. However, this vision depends on providing sufficient housing in these cities for all segments of society in a way that allows residents, workers and visitors to minimize driving.

Unfortunately, the California Coastal Commission and most local governments have prioritized maintaining the status quo by codifying rules that severely restrict multifamily housing construction in most urban areas. For decades, the commission has approved dozens of local coastal programs that limit large areas of coastal cities to single-family housing.

In areas where multi-family housing is permitted, it is typically subject to strict regulations limiting its size and often faces lengthy and unpredictable permitting processes.

The Commission acknowledges that many coastal areas were initially created for explicitly exclusionary and discriminatory reasons. Non-white residents were excluded through property restrictions and strict housing regulations effectively excluded low-income families.

Racial discrimination in the housing market is now illegal, but freezing the size of these older coastal neighborhoods to preserve their visual character cements their exclusivity.

The low population density of most coastal cities increases their dependence on cars. Under the pretext of protecting public access to the coast, the Commission and local governments require that new buildings have excessive parking spaces and limit the number of new buildings to avoid congestion. They erect bureaucratic barriers to improvements in cycling, walking and mass transit for fear that this will reduce parking spaces or slow down car traffic.

All this raises the question: How can we implement the Coastal Act in our coastal cities?