Gaviota Coast, Other Beach Areas Face Pivotal Battles : Land use: Coastal panel in midst of change will decide fate of last major undeveloped sections of Southland shore.

Ellwood Shores, where hawks forage in the fields and monarch butterflies winter in the eucalyptus groves, seems an unlikely battleground.

But this tranquil coastal mesa is a prime development site, commanding a 360-degree view of the sea, tawny grassland and the deep green of the Santa Ynez Mountains.

Its location at the gateway of the Gaviota Coast has thrust this landscape into a heated environmental fight that has far-reaching implications for the last remaining sensitive sites along Southern California’s beaches.

The clash pits a developer, who plans to build 161 homes and condominiums on land at the western edge of Goleta, against environmentalists who prize the site for its open space, wildlife habitat and access to bluffs and beaches.

The fight has raged for years in a county where population growth and a desire for economic development have collided with a reverence for the natural beauty that attracted many residents in the first place.

What happens with the Ellwood Shores project and others between UC Santa Barbara and Gaviota is expected to establish precedents for the California Coastal Commission’s decisions affecting even larger environmentally sensitive properties.

This year, the commission is expected to grapple with the fate of salt marshes in Los Angeles and Orange County--the Ballona wetlands near Marina del Rey and the Bolsa Chica wetlands in Huntington Beach.

As these issues come to the forefront, the political dynamics of the commission are in a state of flux.

Not only is the panel experiencing turnover among elected officials, it also recently got a new chairman--attorney Carl Williams, an appointee of Assemblyman Willie Brown (D-San Francisco).

If Brown loses his bid for another term as Speaker, that would trigger even more dramatic changes on the 12-member commission, which includes four of his appointees, who could be replaced with the new Speaker’s choices.

With such significant economic and environmental issues in the balance, intense behind-the-scenes lobbying of commission members is likely in the months ahead.

“There’s a lot at stake,” said commission Executive Director Peter Douglas. “There are lots of big issues coming up.”

The Gaviota Coast, lying just south of a set of railroad tracks and U.S. 101, includes El Capitan State Beach, Refugio State Beach and Gaviota State Park. Much of the remaining terrain along this 20-mile stretch of oceanfront is ranch land, supporting grazing and limited crops. Occasional oil facilities serve platforms offshore.

The gently rolling coastline with its pastel bluffs and smooth rock outcrops has long been favored by mountain bikers and joggers, surfers and artists, and others just seeking solitude along the shore.

Now, developers are eyeing some of the canyons, grasslands, agricultural properties and oil facilities for residential, resort and recreational construction.

“The last significant stretch of relatively undeveloped, unprotected rural coastline in Southern California is threatened with massive development and urbanization,” said Bob Keats, co-chairman of the newly formed Gaviota Coast Committee. “This really is an endangered resource.”

What is playing out in Santa Barbara County is a clash between the economics of development and environmental protection--1990s style. In days of limited government resources, one increasingly common way to restore or maintain environmentally sensitive property is to develop part of it.

But Santa Barbara County Supervisor Bill Wallace, a dedicated environmentalist, warns that the Gaviota Coast is being “nibbled away.”

In November, after strong lobbying by Atlantic Richfield Co., the Coastal Commission reversed an earlier action and voted 8-2 to approve the company’s controversial plans for two golf courses on agriculturally zoned land west of Goleta.

The proposed golf courses lie outside the county’s boundary line for urban development. And the commission rejected the advice of staff members who warned that the decision would set a bad precedent by breaking down agricultural zoning and opening the door to more development.

Arco representatives countered that the property contains some oil production facilities, is not currently being used for agricultural purposes and is not viable for crops. Attorney Steven H. Kaufmann said the golf course project will enhance public access to the coastline.

That brought a sharp retort from environmentalists and representatives of the Surfrider Foundation, who argued that the land historically has sustained grazing and crops, and ought to be preserved.

Nathan Post of Surfrider warned that the project will erode agricultural zoning and spawn other coastal developments. “By destroying nature and natural habitats, we are really destroying our soul,” Post said.

The $10-million Dos Pueblos golf courses, one 18-hole and the other nine-hole, are not the only projects that could change the look and feel of the Gaviota Coast.

At Haskell’s Beach, east of the Arco property, a $160-million Hyatt hotel is planned. The 400-room Mediterranean-style seaside resort was approved by the Coastal Commission in 1988, but the recession prevented the developer from obtaining financing.

“Our permits are still valid,” project planner John Tynan said. “We’re diligently working on the financing now. We’re hopeful in 1995 everything is going to come together.”

The environmental group Citizens for Goleta Valley had sued to block construction but lost a final state Supreme Court challenge to the hotel’s environmental impact report.

Another environmental lawsuit was settled, with the hotel developer agreeing to provide $5 million to finance a trust fund to acquire open land in the Goleta Valley and possibly along the beaches.

Now the struggle over the Gaviota Coast is focused on the 135-acre Ellwood Shores site, where Southwest Diversified and Coscan Partners want to build upscale homes and condominiums on 38 acres. The remaining acreage would become a nature preserve financed by the home sales.

Experts for the developers and environmentalists agree that part of the Ellwood Shores property contains remnants of native grasslands that have been all but lost on the California coast. But they disagree on the extent of the environmentally sensitive grasslands that warrant protection under the Coastal Act, the law overseen by the Coastal Commission.

“These habitats support a wide variety of sensitive plant and animal species, several of which are regionally rare or restricted,” a commission staff report says.

An expert for the developer--Dennis Murphy, director of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford University--said the conservation value of the property is “profoundly low.” Murphy told the Coastal Commission last summer that he was “disturbed at the misuse of biodiversity as an argument to make a no-growth case.”

Chris Lange, president of the environmental group Save Ellwood Shores, counters that “this place is rare in the scheme of things, rare on the Southern California coast. Leave it like this.”

The most sensitive grasslands are on portions of the property that would draw the highest prices for homes--sites that command stunning ocean views of the Channel Islands and the coastline to Point Conception. And it is there that the battle has been joined.

To build on the property, Southwest Diversified needs a change in Santa Barbara County’s state-certified coastal program that establishes land uses.

For more than a year, the proposed change that would allow development has been the central element in a tug of war between the county Board of Supervisors and the Coastal Commission. Each agency has reversed itself at least once--and the fate of the project is still unresolved.

When pro-growth forces dominated the Board of Supervisors in 1993, they voted to allow building on about 40 acres of the Ellwood Shores site.

The Coastal Commission initially rejected the project last January, then in August endorsed the developer’s revised proposal to build on 38 acres.

When the issue came back to the county in the fall, environmentalists had won control of the Board of Supervisors and they scaled the project back to about 31 acres to protect the most sensitive grasslands.

“You cannot build in wetlands and environmentally sensitive habitat,” said Supervisor Wallace, whose district encompasses the Gaviota Coast. “It sets a precedent for anywhere else.”

Southwest Diversified attorney Randall Fox said the county’s changes mean the project is no longer viable economically because some of the most marketable residential units with the best views cannot be built. “I think the county acted illegally,” he said.

In October, Southwest Diversified filed suit, seeking $50 million in damages and accusing the supervisors of using extraordinary procedures to effectively deny use of the property. In a recent letter, the developer also threatened to sue the commission if it goes along with the county.

Both Wallace and Naomi Schwartz, chairwoman of the Board of Supervisors, blame behind-the-scenes lobbying in part for the commission’s preliminary decision to accept development on 38 acres.

Commission records show that lobbyists for Southwest Diversified, like those for Arco and other developers, held private discussions with individual coastal commissioners before key commission meetings. Ten of the commissioners submitted the required written forms reporting that they had private, legally known as ex-parte, contacts with lobbyists on Ellwood Shores in the past year.

The forms are required to be completed within seven days of the contact under provisions of a 1992 state law intended to protect the integrity of the commission’s decision making.

In August, a majority of commission members also provided brief oral reports of additional recent ex-parte contacts with lobbyists.

California Deputy Atty. Gen. Matt Rodriguez advised the panel to make additional disclosure “to protect both the integrity of the commission’s decision, as well as the individual commissioners.” He told them, “It is important to let the audience know whether there was anything that was disclosed to you that is not in the record.”

Commissioners responded that nothing had been discussed privately that was not part of the public record.

Fox, the developer’s attorney, defended the private contacts. “I think the time you spend talking to people one on one is important,” he said. “We just view that as a normal course of participating in the process.”

Once again, the Board of Supervisors is changing to a pro-growth majority this month, and a reversal of the county’s tough stance on Ellwood Shores is possible.

The final decision by the Coastal Commission may presage actions on other fragile properties, according to some familiar with the agency.

“If the commission allows development in environmentally sensitive habitat areas here, they can allow development up and down the coast,” said Linda Krop, an attorney with the Environmental Defense Center in Santa Barbara. “It is a very frightening precedent.”

The next major issue facing the Gaviota Coast is a plan by Mobil Oil Corp. to use new technology onshore to drill for oil off Goleta. A preliminary proposal, which Mobil expects to unveil this month, calls for construction of a 175-foot drilling tower east of Ellwood Shores.

The company hopes to lease the land from the University of California to drill under the ocean floor to oil and natural gas in an offshore field. The company has dubbed the project “Clearview” because of a promise to remove the aging Platform Holly drilling structure offshore.

But some university faculty, students and environmentalists fear the drilling project will adversely affect the coast and create potential pollution hazards, including toxic hydrogen sulfide gas.

Mobil officials defend the project as environmentally sound. “We believe we can do it in a safe manner,” said spokeswoman Shauna Clarke.

After years of wrangling, battles over large coastal developments in Los Angeles and Orange counties also are making their way to the Coastal Commission.

The first to reach the panel this year may be Los Angeles County’s plan to redevelop Marina del Rey, allowing substantial increases in the height and density of future development around the harbor.

The county, which owns the marina and leases it to developers, wants to see additional residential, commercial, retail and hotel construction there as well as more boat slips. Some buildings as tall as 225 feet would be permitted.

Redevelopment plans in the area also include a new marina that is part of the neighboring Playa Vista project by Maguire Thomas Partners. Boat slips would be surrounded by 2,576 residential units, 450 hotel rooms, office and retail space and a marine science center.

“One of the big issues is going to be whether there has to be a boating facility,” said Douglas of the Coastal Commission.

Project manager Doug Gardner said Maguire Thomas is considering alternatives that would stop short of a full-fledged marina.

The commission also will eventually consider other aspects of the $7-billion Playa Vista project, which calls for construction of a city within a city.

To settle a longstanding environmentalist lawsuit, Maguire Thomas has agreed to restore roughly 250 acres of the adjoining Ballona wetlands, now estimated to cost more than $12.5 million.

Douglas said the commission will review the proposal to restore the wetlands, which have been shrinking because of man-made restrictions on tidal flows.

In Huntington Beach, a contentious struggle over the fate of the Bolsa Chica wetlands is also reaching a critical stage. The Koll Real Estate Group wishes to develop the bluff tops and low marshes surrounding the wetlands.

Originally, the company wanted to build 4,286 homes. But Orange County officials, who are preparing to submit a comprehensive land use plan for the area to the Coastal Commission, recently scaled back the potential development to 3,300 homes.

The county Board of Supervisors last month unanimously approved the plan, which includes a $48-million program to restore 940 acres of the wetlands. It features a new tidal inlet from the Pacific Ocean.

Lucy Dunn, senior vice president of Koll Real Estate, said the development will result in creation of more wetlands of a higher quality than exist today.

The extent of construction proposed for lowland areas adjoining the wetlands--900 homes--has raised questions for Coastal Commission staff. “We have major concerns about any housing development in the lowlands below the mesa,” Douglas said. “We don’t think that is allowed by the Coastal Act . . . We have a real serious problem with that.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Coastal Plans

The scenic Gaviota coast in Santa Barbara County is the focal point of a struggle over coastal development. Decisions by the California Coastal Commission on controversial projects planned for the area may set precedents affecting environmentally sensitive sites on the Los Angeles and Orange County coast.

Major projects planned for the Gaviota coast:

1. MOBIL OIL CORP.

* Location: Goleta

* Plans: Mobil is preparing plans to drill for oil offshore from a point onshore now owned by the University of California. To win public support, Mobil intends to remove the aging offshore Platform Holly. The drilling plan is generating opposition.

2. ELLWOOD SHORES

* Location: Goleta

* Plans: Developers Southwest Diversified and Coscan Partners want to build 161 residential units on 38 acres. The rest of the 135-acre property would be placed in a nature preserve. The county Board of Supervisors has scaled back to 31 acres to avoid environmentally sensitive areas. The developer is suing the county, saying the plan is too restrictive.

3. HYATT HOTEL

* Location: Haskell’s Beach, west of Goleta

* Plans: This long-delayed project calls for construction of a $160-million resort hotel with 400 rooms. The project, approved by the Coastal Commission in 1988, has survived legal challenges from environmental groups, but stalled because of financing difficulties.

4. ARCO DOS PUEBLOS GOLF COURSES

* Location: West of Goleta

* Plans: Arco plans to build an 18-hole and a nine-hole golf course on a 200-acre oceanfront site. The area is designated agricultural land. Arco says part of the site is used for oil production and is not being farmed. Environmental and surfer organizations oppose the project.

SOUTHLAND PROJECTS

Major projects pending on the Los Angeles and Orange County coast:

BOLSA CHICA

* Location: Huntington Beach

* Plans: The developer, Koll Real Estate Group, has been trying to build a residential community on bluff areas and lowland marshes near the Bolsa Chica wetlands. The project has been controversial for years. Although Koll had wanted to build 4,286 homes, the county Board of Supervisors voted to allow 3,300 homes. The county also wants the developer to undertake a $48-million program to restore 940 acres of degraded wetlands, including creation of a new tidal inlet from the ocean.

MARINA DEL REY REDEVELOPMENT

* Location: Marina del Rey

* Plans: Los Angeles County is seeking to intensively redevelop Marina del Rey by substantially increasing residential, hotel, restaurant, office and retail space. The new projects could transform the marina into a high-rise enclave. The height and density of the development has generated some opposition.

PLAYA VISTA

* Location: Marina del Rey/Playa del Rey

* Plans: Developer Maguire Thomas Partners plans to build a waterfront community of residential, hotel, office and retail space surrounding a new harbor next to Marina del Rey. The waterfront is one element in the $7-billion Playa Vista project. To settle a longstanding environmental lawsuit, Maguire Thomas has agreed to restore about 250 acres of the nearby Ballona wetlands. The wetlands restoration is now expected to cost more than $12.5 million. Although it has won support from prominent environmental groups, the Playa Vista project is still controversial.