Pierside Village Hits Snag; Modified Plan OKd

The controversial Pierside Village project hit a snag Monday night when the City Council learned that the development might be considered “waterfront property” and therefore subject to new rules.

City Administrator Michael T. Uberuaga told the council that state law requires a four-fifths vote before a governing body may transfer “waterfront property” to another entity. Uberuaga said that City Atty. Gail C. Hutton needed additional time to research whether paved land on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway is “waterfront.”

The little-known 1947 law would require a yes vote by at least six of the council’s seven members. Three members oppose the project.

The council thus delayed until April 15 a proposal to transfer city land near the pier to the city’s Redevelopment Agency.

Pierside Village would be a plaza of commercial restaurants just south of the city’s pier at Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. The proposal has inflamed bitter debate within the city and prompted a citizens’ initiative, Measure C, which forbids the city to sell or lease beach or park land without a majority vote of the people.

It is still not legally clear, according to city government, whether Measure C now requires a special election on Pierside Village. Hutton has said it “probably” does, but she has not made a definitive ruling.

But in the meantime, the new legal question about whether Pierside is waterfront property has added to the confusion over Pierside Village’s status, city officials said.

Nevertheless, late Monday night the council voted 4 to 3 to accept a slightly modified version of the Pierside Village plan as approved by the Planning Commission last November. That vote accepts the plan but does not give the project the full green light.

Opponents of Pierside Village urged the council to reject the project, contending that it would blight the city’s ocean view near the pier. Opponents also charged that building new restaurants on the land would violate a public easement, or land-use permission, the city has held on the land since 1932.

Supporters of the project argued that Pierside Village would beautify an “ugly” area of paved land and would also improve public access to the beach.