Coastal resources: coastal development permit application: higher education housing project.

In a measure authored by Assembly Member Alvarez, the proposal reframes how coastal development planning for state universities and private colleges proceeds in California, focusing on public works and long-range development plans and introducing a formal de minimis pathway alongside enhanced transparency. The bill clarifies the framework for university-led plans submitted for coastal review, emphasizes coordination with local governments, and introduces targeted changes to parking and transportation considerations that guide how housing facilities are planned near the coast. Authors describe the aim as improving planning efficiency while maintaining alignment with coastal policies and local oversight.

A core mechanism adds a de minimis approval pathway for proposed amendments, enabling the Coastal Commission’s executive director to determine within ten working days whether an amendment would have no coastal-resource impact and is consistent with applicable policies. If the determination is de minimis, the amendment is placed on the agenda of the next regularly scheduled commission meeting; three commissioners can object, triggering either a public hearing or a process to return the amendment to the university, with time requirements active from the date of the objection. If no such objection occurs, the amendment becomes part of the certified plan upon adjournment of the meeting. Alongside this, the measure requires the commission to publish on its public website a description, status, approval conditions, and timelines for all public works plans, long-range development plans, amendments, and notices of impending development submitted by universities, with monthly updates to ensure public access to the planning status.

The bill also shifts planning priorities and parking determinations for housing facilities, directing the commission to prioritize active and public transportation facilities over vehicle parking when considering certifications or amendments to long-range development plans. For housing facilities proposed within those plans, the commission would defer to the university in determining the number of parking spaces needed for residents. In addition, a certified long-range development plan may be amended only after the amendment has itself been certified by the commission, and any amendment to a certified plan would follow the same processing as amendments to local coastal programs, with ongoing coordination required with affected local governments.

Viewed in context, the measure maintains alignment with the California Coastal Act and the Local Coastal Program framework while adding a structured channel for minor amendments, new public reporting obligations, and a shift in parking and transportation planning for university housing along the coast. Authors emphasize transparency and regular public disclosure, and the proposal creates a defined pathway for de minimis amendments that could streamline routine updates while preserving opportunities for public scrutiny through hearings when objections arise. Fiscal considerations note that no explicit appropriation is included, potentially affecting implementation costs related to staff time for de minimis determinations, hearings, and website maintenance, with funding addressed through existing resources or future budget processes. The proposal thus delineates a tighter, more publicly visible process for university-driven coastal development activity, balancing local coordination with university planning prerogatives.