Panel Delays Its Decision on Hellman Development

Expressing concerns that the controversial Hellman Ranch proposal might violate state coastal law, the California Coastal Commission on Wednesday delayed a ruling on the plan--a surprise turn of events that disappointed the project’s supporters and critics alike.

That vote by the commission, which was meeting in Santa Barbara, came after more than four hours of emotional testimony. Some argued that the project in Seal Beach would be the city’s last chance to restore an environmentally degraded area. Others condemned it, saying it would destroy some of Orange County’s fast-vanishing wetlands.

In one of the day’s most suspenseful moments, newly appointed commissioner Shirley S. Dettloff, mayor of Huntington Beach, stated her position: that after long study, she felt that the plan would not mesh with the Coastal Act.

As the only Orange County elected official on the panel, Dettloff was considered a pivotal vote.

More than 170 people packed a hotel meeting room to hear the debate Wednesday. Among them were dozens of Seal Beach residents who rose at dawn to take chartered buses to the meeting.

“I’m surprised and quite disappointed that local decisions aren’t more respected,” said Jerry Tone, a member of the Hellman family spearheading the project. Seal Beach officials, too, staunchly support the family’s plans, but they have been repeatedly criticized by environmentalists.

Susan Jordan, a board member of the League for Coastal Protection, an environmental group, said she would have preferred a vote Wednesday but added: “The Coastal Commission has sent the applicant a very clear message--the project is not consistent with the Coastal Act.”

The Hellman Ranch proposal for 70 luxury homes and an 18-hole golf course has touched off a major policy debate over how the state should deal with pressures to develop the last remnants of Southern California’s coastal wetlands. Specifically, it has stirred controversy over whether the law allows wetlands to be filled for construction of a golf course.

Caught up in that debate, commissioners voted 7 to 4 to delay a decision, asking their staff to work in coming weeks to reach a compromise with the developer--perhaps making the golf course smaller or the wetlands area larger.

The postponement suggested that support for the project may be eroding among commissioners who had defended it earlier this year. The panel’s staff has since raised questions about whether the project would fit the state Coastal Act, which outlines terms of development along California’s 1,100-mile shoreline.

With as much as 90% of the state’s wetlands already developed, environmentalists have intensified their efforts to save what is left. But developers such as Hellman Properties LLC, with offices in San Francisco and Seal Beach, have responded with proposals that would encompass both construction and wetlands restoration.

The Hellman project has gained such a high profile because it raises what both sides consider pivotal questions about what wetlands restoration really means.

The plan for the 196-acre tract calls for a gated community and an adjoining golf course, along with 28 acres of restored wetlands and 16 acres labeled for either future wetlands or open space.

City officials have praised the plan as far superior to earlier, failed projects on the same site. The Coastal Commission staff initially supported the golf course proposal later changed its position.

Stating bluntly that its earlier stance was “in error,” the staff urged striking the golf course from the project on the grounds that the Coastal Act does not permit the filling of wetlands for golf course construction.

Peter Douglas, the commission’s executive director, underscored that as the meeting convened Wednesday.

“We do not often change our recommendation on a major component of a project,” Douglas said.

Despite the strong language of the staff report, some commissioners still puzzled over how to make the project fit the letter of the law. Others warned that the panel had learned a harsh lesson when its approval of development at the nearby Bolsa Chica wetlands was rejected in state Superior Court.

“We’re being asked by the applicant to destroy coastal resources for the sake of a golf course,” said Commissioner Pedro Nava, a Santa Barbara attorney.