Vote on homes by Bolsa Chica is postponed

The report indicates that the location of the barrier "presents the only feasible option for adequately insuring protection" of the existing 170-acre development."

Alternative locations are mentioned in the staff report, but were dismissed for being too expensive or less feasible.

In its letter to the coastal commission, the land trust states that the barrier violates the local coastal program — the guidelines under which the coastal commission will consider the project.

The local coastal program prohibits the building of protective devices as part of new developments.

But the local coastal program also states in another passage that, "Drainage systems and other such facilities necessary to ensure public health or safety may be allowed provided that bluff alteration is restricted to the minimum necessary and is done in the least environmentally damaging feasible manner."

The land trust acknowledges the contradicting statements of the local coastal program and sites the balancing provision, which must be used when there are conflicts between policies in the coastal program.

The balancing provision in the coastal program states that, "When policies within the Coastal Element conflict, such conflicts shall be resolved in a manner which on balance is the most protective of significant coastal resources."

The land trust argues that not building the barrier would be the most protective option.

In a response to the land trust's objections, coastal commission staff, which is recommending approval of the project, said the two passages in the local coastal program do not conflict and that the barrier is needed to protect already existing developments as well as the Shea Homes project.

mona.shadia@latimes.com

Twitter: @MonaShadia