HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-05-11; Historic Preservation Commission; 01; Planning and Environmental Review ProcessMeeting Date: May 11, 2026
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Mike Strong, Director of Community Development
Staff Contact: Mike Strong, Director of Community Development
Mike.strong@carlsbadca.gov, 442-339-2721
Subject: Planning and Environmental Review Process
Recommended Action
Provide the Historic Preservation Commission with a greater understanding of historic
resources, the role the Historic Preservation Commission has in the planning and environmental
review process, and resources available to aid the Historic Preservation Commission in that role.
Executive Summary
Balancing historic preservation and community development is vital for maintaining a
community’s historical narrative. But it can be complex. Even though there may be regulations
in place to implement historic preservation by establishing incentives and benefits or zoning
parameters that restrict certain land uses (what and where), property owners may still give in
to development pressures that may compromise this balance. Even well-intended land use
development projects on properties that have historical resources, like historic homes, may
have a significant impact.
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the Historic Preservation Commission with a
greater understanding of historic resources, the role the Historic Preservation Commission has
in the planning and environmental review process, and resources available to aid the Historic
Preservation Commission in that role. At the May 11, 2026, Historic Preservation Commission
meeting, city staff will also provide an overview of recent state legislation that streamlined
environmental review for certain types of housing projects.
Discussion
The City Council adopted an ordinance in 1985 that set forth procedures to designate historic
resources, landmarks and districts within the city. The Historic Preservation Commission was
created in 1997 to help administer the city’s historic preservation policies and programs. Since
the program was adopted, 19 properties have received varying forms of recognition by the City
Council, of which 13 are still in existence.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
May 11, 2026 Item #1 1 of 12
(CMC). As part of this effort, staff took the opportunity to clarify and simplify the regulations to
improve readability and implementation as well as clarify the roles and responsibilities of the
Historic Preservation Commission. This work has resulted in a major overhaul to Title
22.Ordinance No. CS-438 revised the criteria for designating historic resources, historic
landmarks and historic districts to be consistent with state law. For example, state law1
requires that for a property or structure to be designated as a historic resource, a resolution
must be approved by the decision-making authority – in Carlsbad, the City Council – and
recorded on the property’s title. Under Ordinance No. CS-438, only a property owner may
initiate the process for designating a property as historic. If the Historic Preservation
Commission recommends, and the City Council determines that a property qualifies for the City
of Carlsbad Historic Resource Register (Local Register), then the property is designated as a
historic resource. The process for removing the property from the Local Register is proposed to
follow the same process.
Ordinance No. CS-438 also updated the permit procedures to alter, tear down, demolish,
construct, remove, or relocate any portion of a nominated historic resource, designated historic
resource, or any property located within a historic district (refer to CMC Section 22.08.020).
Under Ordinance No. CS-438, alteration, demolition, reconstruction, rehabilitation or
restorative work on a historic resource would require a permit. If the application for work is on
a historic resource subject to a historical property contract – that is, a Mills Act contract – then
the City Planner would review the scope of work to make sure it is consistent with the terms of
the contract, the Secretary of Interior’s Standards2 and any applicable local guidelines or
standards adopted, and issue a permit administratively. If the application is for a property not
subject to a historical property contract or cannot be issued administratively, then the Historic
Preservation Commission must hold a public hearing to consider the request.
Land Use Development Background
The City of Carlsbad plans and regulates the use of land to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare; ensure projects consider community design character; promote economic
development; and plan for public infrastructure. The state requires the city to have a General
Plan, which expresses the community’s goals and policies for land use. In essence, the General
Plan is an expression of the city’s vision for how it will develop, shown visually in its land use
map (in the Land Use Element portion of the General Plan).
From the General Plan comes various regulations to implement it, including a zoning map and
zoning code, along with the subdivision code, Climate Action Plan, TDM Ordinance and grading
1 Public Resources Code Section 5029 and California Government Code Section 27288.2
2 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are published by the U.S.
Department of the Interior and are common sense historic preservation principles in non-technical language. They
promote historic preservation best practices, which help to protect cultural resources.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 2 of 12
On Nov. 8, 2022, City Council adopted Ordinance No. CS-438 which made amendments to the
city’s historical preservation ordinance – contained in Title 22 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
such as the Habitat Management Plan. Additionally, all projects must undergo environmental
review, pursuant to CEQA and environmental code, unless a finding can be made to exempt the
project. CEQA, or the California Environmental Quality Act, is a key piece of state legislation
that shapes the environmental process for public agencies in California. In recent years, as the
city has nearly fully urbanized, most projects are eligible for streamlining options, which
exempts projects from intensive CEQA review.
After a land use development application is filed, ultimately, it is the expectation that the city
will identify project issues and requirements at the start of every project, so applicants have a
clear expectation of the project issues, costs, and schedule. Reviewing projects for consistency
with planning documents and regulations ensures that the new projects are in alignment with
the community values and city policies, ordinances, and standards. Overall, the land use
development process requires substantial coordination between property owners/applicants,
city staff, and outside agencies. Depending on the scope of a project, there could be different
types of approvals required for developing property. The land use development application
permit type, review, and approval process vary from one development project to another;
however, there are similar steps involved with each project. The city’s Permit and Service Guide
(Exhibit 1) provides a high-level overview of that process. Following the staff and agency review
process, the Planning Division will determine the level of environmental review during initial
review of the application. If CEQA analysis is required, cities cannot approve the project without
completing the CEQA process and certifying the required CEQA document.
CEQA Background
CEQA is the principal statute mandating environmental assessment of private and public
projects.3 The purpose of CEQA is to evaluate whether a proposed project may have an adverse
effect on the environment and, if so, if that effect can be reduced or eliminated by pursuing an
alternative course of action or through mitigation. CEQA gives direction and guidance for
evaluation of properties for the preparation of environmental reviews such as Negative
Declarations, Mitigated Negative Declarations, and Environmental Impact Reports; and for
when further environmental review is not required (exemptions). These state laws are further
supplemented by local regulations provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Code – Title 19
(Environment) and Title 22 (Historic Preservation).
CEQA applies to discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public
agencies. These projects must be subject to discretionary funding or approval and cause a
3 CEQA applies to "projects" proposed to be undertaken or requiring approval. “Projects” are activities which have
the potential to have a physical impact on the environment and may include the enactment of zoning ordinances,
the issuance of conditional use permits and variances and the approval of tentative subdivision maps.
4 A ministerial project is one that requires only conformance with a fixed standard or objective measurement and
requires little or no personal judgment by a public official as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 3 of 12
code. Existing area or site-specific regulations may also apply to a property, including a specific
plan or master plan. Depending on proximity to sensitive areas, other regulations may apply,
exempt from CEQA. However, projects that aren’t exempt require further study to determine if
they will have “significant” impacts on the environment. An intensive CEQA process can
significantly impact the planning process since it can take months and sometimes over a year to
complete. If CEQA analysis is required, cities cannot approve the project without completing
the CEQA process and certifying the required CEQA document. While this has helped a number
of important environmental initiatives statewide, it has been proven to pose significant
challenges for developers, leading to delays in project approvals. Because of these impacts, and
the on-going housing crisis, the State Legislature have been looking for ways to make the
development process more efficient and responsive to the needs of the state’s housing market.
Recent reforms, such as Assembly Bill 130 and Senate Bill 131 have aimed to reduce the burden
of CEQA on development, particularly for infill housing projects. These reforms include
exemptions from CEQA review.
CEQA Screening Criteria
Historic resources may consist of any structures, buildings, sites, artifacts, or landscape
features, or portions thereof with historic authenticity, integrity, value, and/or importance.
Historic resources can also include local historic landmarks, contributing resources to a historic
district, and qualified historical properties. Projects that affect historical resources, like historic
homes, through demolition, relocation, rehabilitation, conversion, alteration, or construction,
may have a significant impact if the project results in a substantial adverse change which would
impair historical significance. Insensitive rehabilitation, conversion, alteration or construction
may also result in a significant impact.
For the purposes of CEQA the term “historical resource” is used when the property meets the
terms of the definitions in Section 21084.1 of the CEQA Statute and Section 15064.5 of the
CEQA Guidelines. “Historical Resources” include properties listed in or formally determined
eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or listed in an adopted local
historic register. (For the City of Carlsbad, the Local Register includes a list of resources that are
officially designated or recognized as historically significant by resolution of the City Council).
“Historical Resources” may also include properties identified as significant in an historical
resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code. The
city’s 1991 survey does not meet the requirements of 5024.1(k) – so the survey does not
provide a presumption that properties identified are historic resources. However, a resource
does not need to have been identified previously either through listing or survey to be
considered significant under CEQA. Properties, which are not listed but are otherwise
determined to be historically significant, based on substantial evidence, could also be
considered “historical resources.” For this reason, the city adopted a screening threshold of 45
years. That is, any building older than 45 years of age or older warrants review.
Generally ministerial permits require a public official to determine only that the project conforms with applicable
zoning and building code requirements and that applicable fees have been paid.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 4 of 12
physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment. CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects.4 Many small projects are also
In addition to assessing whether historical resources potentially impacted by a proposed
project are listed or have been identified in a survey, lead agencies have a responsibility to
evaluate them against the California Register criteria prior to making a finding as to a proposed
project’s impact to historical resources. Under CEQA, evaluation of the potential for proposed
projects to impact “historical resources,” the first step is to determine whether the property is
an “historical resource” as defined in CEQA Section 15064.5(a)(3). If it is a “historical resource,”
the second is to evaluate whether the action or project causes a “substantial adverse change”
to the resource.
STEP 1 – Is the Property a “Historical Resource?”
The following types of properties will be evaluated as “historical resources” for purposes
of CEQA:
•Resources listed on or formally determined to be eligible for the California
Register.
•Resources listed on adopted Local Register.
•Properties requiring further review.
For the first two bullets, only a preponderance of the evidence demonstrating that the
resource is not historically significant will preclude evaluation of the property as an
historical resource. For the last bullet, properties that do not meet the criteria for the
first two bullets, but for which the city has information indicating that further
consultation and review will be required, may still be a historical resource for the
purposes of CEQA. When processing a land use development application, the Planning
Division may request additional information to assist in the determination whether that
property is an historical resource for purposes of CEQA and/or to aid in the evaluation of
the effects a proposed project may have on a historical resource. The Planning Division
will consider any information submitted by members of the public, or analysis by
Planning Division experts, when determining whether an otherwise unlisted property
may be a historical resource. Usually, site recordings, or updates to previously recorded
sites, are documented by a qualified professional using the most current revision of the
California’s DPR 523 series Historical Resources Inventory forms (DPR Form) following
the Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. All surveys for historic structures
must be conducted using the Secretary of the Interior's standards for the identification
of Historic Properties.
Buildings less than 45 years old at the time of study are exempt from evaluation as
modern resources, unless previously determined to be historically significant or unless
determined by a qualified professional to be of exceptional significance. A property that
has achieved significance within the past fifty years can still be evaluated only when
sufficient historical perspective exists. The necessary perspective can be provided by
scholarly research and evaluation, and must consider both the historic context and the
May 11, 2026 Item #1 5 of 12
specific property's role in that context. Absent additional information provided to the
city that a property is significant pursuant to the criteria in Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, properties in this category will not be evaluated as historical resources.
STEP 2 – Is there a “Substantial Adverse Change” to the Resource?
After determining that a property is an “historical resource” for the purposes of CEQA,
the next step is to determine if the proposed project could cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an historical resource. CEQA defines a ʺsubstantial adverse
changeʺ as the physical demolition, destruction, relocation or alteration of the historic
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historic resource
would be materially impaired.
CEQA goes on to define ʺmaterially impairedʺ as work that materially alters, in an
adverse manner, those physical characteristics that convey historical significance and
justify its inclusion in a Local, State, or National Register. If the resource has not been
listed on any register or survey but nonetheless is found to be a historical resource, the
city will determine whether a proposed project materially impairs those physical
characteristics that convey the resource’s historical significance for the purposes of
CEQA.
As applied, a historic resource on the Local Register will be evaluated to determine if the
proposed project will demolish, destroy, relocate or alter those physical characteristics
which convey the resource’s historical significance and which justify its inclusion on the
Local Register or in the California Register of Historic Places. If the proposed project will
not create a substantial adverse change, a Categorical Exemption or a Negative
Declaration will be appropriate. If the proposed project will cause a substantial adverse
change, the city must determine if this impact can or cannot be mitigated. If it can be
mitigated, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. If it cannot be mitigated, an
Environmental Impact Report must be prepared.
The table provided in Exhibit 2 indicates the anticipated “process” for projects, divided
into four major categories. It should be noted that as a general rule, a significant impact
is considered mitigated if the property follows the Secretary of the Interiorʹs Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating,
Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.
At the May 11, 2026, Historic Preservation Commission meeting, city staff will provide a
presentation that outlines the planning and environmental review process and will be available
to answer questions related to CEQA review procedures for historic resources, which may
include historic buildings, structures, districts, objects or sites.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 6 of 12
Fiscal Analysis
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with receiving this informational report.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 7 of 12
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
The proposed action is not a “project” as defined by CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15378(b)(5) and does not require environment review under CEQA Guidelines Section
15060(c)(3) and 15061(b)(3), because the proposed action to adopt an annual work plan is an
organizational or administrative government activity that does not involve any commitment to
any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the
environment. Any subsequent action or direction stemming from the proposed action may
require preparation of an environmental document in accordance with CEQA or CEQA
Guidelines.
Exhibits
1 Permit and Service Guide
2 Anticipated Review Process for Different Permit Types
May 11, 2026 Item #1 8 of 12
Exhibit 1
Permit and Service Guide
(On file in the Planning Division.)
May 11, 2026 Item #1 9 of 12
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 2
Anticipated Review Process for Different Permit Types
Type of Permit Historical Status Current Review Process
Discretionary permit (that
requires CEQA) with potential
for a substantial adverse
change to historic resource
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
A MND or EIR will be prepared by the City Planner, which would be referred to the HPC
for review and comment. The project permit and proposed environmental clearance
would be forwarded to the City Planner, PC, or City Council depending on decision-
making authority. If the building is proposed to be delisted from a Register, the HPC
and City Council must both hold hearings.
Not listed on a Register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Additional review performed by city staff to determine if the building qualifies as a
historic resource. If determined to be historic, a MND or EIR will be prepared, which
would be referred to the HPC for review and comment. The project permit and
proposed environmental clearance would be forwarded to the City Planner, PC, or City
Council depending on decision-making authority.
N/A – not eligible If the building is not historic – there is no referral to HPC. The permit would be
approved by City Planner, PC, or City Council depending on review authority.
Discretionary permit (that
requires CEQA) with no
substantial adverse change to
historic resource
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
A categorical exemption or a ND may be prepared by the City Planner. If a ND is
prepared, the document would be referred to the HPC for review and comment. The
project permit and proposed environmental clearance would be forwarded to the City
Planner, PC, or City Council depending on decision-making authority.
Not listed on a Register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Additional review performed by city staff to determine if the building qualifies as a
historic resource. If determined to be historic, a categorical exemption or ND may be
prepared, which would be referred to the HPC for review and comment. The project
permit and proposed environmental clearance would be forwarded to the City Planner,
PC, or City Council depending on decision-making authority.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 10 of 12
N/A – not eligible The permit would be approved by City Planner, PC, or City Council depending on
review authority.
Site Development that is
exempt from CEQA with a
potential substantial adverse
change to historic resource
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
If the project qualifies for the exemption, the permit would be approved by City
Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending on decision-making
authority. If the building is proposed to be delisted from a Register, the HPC and City
Council must both hold hearings.
Not listed on a Register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Some State laws disqualify the use of exemptions if the project is located on property
with a historic resource. Others do not. Therefore, additional reviews are performed by
city staff to determine if the building qualifies as a historic resource and determine
which environmental process to follow. There is no referral to HPC. If disqualified,
another environmental process is followed. If eligible for the exemption, the permit
would be approved by City Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending
on decision-making authority.
N/A – not eligible The building is not historic. There is no referral to HPC. The permit would be approved
by City Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending on review authority.
Site Development that is
exempt from CEQA with no
substantial adverse change to
historic resource
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
If the project qualifies for the exemption, the permit would be approved by City
Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending on decision-making
authority.
Not listed on a Register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Some State laws disqualify the use of exemptions if the project is located on property
with a historic resource. Others do not. Therefore, additional reviews are performed by
city staff to determine if the building qualifies as a historic resource and determine
which environmental process to follow. There is no referral to HPC. If disqualified,
another environmental process is followed. If eligible for the exemption, the permit
would be approved by City Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending
on decision-making authority.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 11 of 12
N/A – not eligible The building is not historic. There is no referral to HPC. The permit would be approved
by City Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council depending on review authority.
Building permit with a
potential substantial adverse
change
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
Historic Preservation Permit reviewed and decided by the HPC. If approved, then
building permits are issued by Building Official.
Not listed on a Register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Building permit issued by Building Official. There is no referral to HPC.
N/A – not eligible Building permit issued by Building Official. There is no referral to HPC.
Building permit with no
potential substantial adverse
change
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
Historic Preservation Permit issued by the City Planner if the work is consistent with
Secretary of the Interiorʹs Standards. If approved, then building permits are issued by
Building Official. There is no referral to HPC.
Not listed on a register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
Building permit issued by Building Official. There is no referral to HPC.
N/A – not eligible Building permit issued by Building Official. There is no referral to HPC.
Ordinary maintenance and
repair
On the Federal, State, or
Local Register
No building permit required. There is no referral to HPC.
Not listed on a register,
but > 45 years of age
(eligible)
No building permit required. There is no referral to HPC.
N/A – not eligible No building permit required. There is no referral to HPC.
May 11, 2026 Item #1 12 of 12
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION
Item 1 - Planning and Environmental Review
Process
MAY 11, 2026
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
•Discussion on “process” in previous meetings
•Most recent was with the recommended adoption of the FY 2026-27 Work Plan
•The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the HPC with a greater
understanding of historic resources, the role the HPC has in the planning and environmental review process, and resources available to aid the HPC in that role.
•1985 ordinance
•HPC created in 1997
•19 properties received recognition
•13 remain on the Local Register
ITEM 1: PLANNING AND ENV. REVIEW
3
DISCUSSION
•2022 ordinance
•Amended Title 22
•Revised the criteria to nominate a resource to the
Local Register
•Created a Local Mills Program
•Updated the permit procedures
ITEM 1: PLANNING AND ENV. REVIEW
4
DISCUSSION CONT’D
•General Plan
•Zoning Ordinance
•CEQA
ITEM 1: PLANNING AND ENV. REVIEW
5
DISCUSSION CONT’D
CEQA
•CEQA applies to discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or
approved.
•CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects.
•Projects that aren’t exempt are required to perform environmental
analysis.
CEQA CONT’D
•CEQA causes challenges for developers
•Because of these impacts, and the on-going housing crisis, the State
Legislature have made reforms.
•Assembly Bill 130 and Senate Bill 131 have aimed to reduce the
burden of CEQA on development, particularly for infill housing
projects. These reforms include exemptions from CEQA review.
CEQA SCREENING
•For the purposes of CEQA the term “historical resource” is used
when the property meets the terms of the definitions in Section
21084.1 of the CEQA Statute and Section 15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
CEQA SCREENING CONT’D
STEP 1 – Is the Property a “Historical Resource?”
The following types of properties will be evaluated as “historical resources” for purposes of CEQA:
•Resources listed on or formally determined to be eligible for the California Register.
•Resources listed on adopted Local Register.
•Properties requiring further review.
The Planning Division may request additional information to assist in the determination whether that property is an historical resource for purposes of CEQA and/or to aid in the evaluation of the effects a proposed project may have on a historical resource
CEQA SCREENING CONT’D
•Buildings more than 45 years old is reviewed for eligibility.
•Buildings less than 45 years old at the time of study are exempt from evaluation as modern resources, unless previously determined to be historically significant or unless determined by a qualified professional
to be of exceptional significance.
CEQA SCREENING CONT’D
STEP 2 – Is there a “Substantial Adverse Change” to the Resource?
•CEQA defines a ʺsubstantial adverse changeʺ as the physical demolition, destruction, relocation or alteration of the historic resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historic resource would be materially impaired.
•CEQA goes on to define ʺmaterially impairedʺ as work that materially alters, in an adverse manner, those physical characteristics that convey historical significance and justify its inclusion in a Local, State, or National Register.
If the resource has not been listed on any register or survey but nonetheless is found to be a historical resource, the city will determine whether a proposed project materially impairs those physical characteristics that convey the resource’s historical significance for the purposes of CEQA.
RECENT REFORMS - CEQA EXEMPTIONS
•Senate Bill 684 (SB 684) became state law in 2023. It requires local agencies to ministerially consider, without discretionary review or a hearing, certain parcel maps or tentative and final maps for certain housing development projects.
•Among other things, a qualifying subdivision must result in 10 or fewer parcels and the housing development project on the lot proposed to be subdivided must contain 10 or fewer residential units.
•Exemptions: 1) Prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance; 2) Wetlands; 3) Very high fire hazard severity zone; 4) Land identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan; 5) Habitat for protected species; or 6) Lands under a conservation easement.
RECENT REFORMS – AB 130
•Trailer budget bill became state law in 2025.
•AB 130 includes a new exemption from CEQA for certain urban infill housing development projects. The exemption, codified in Public Resources Code Section 21080.66, provides a complete exemption from CEQA for all aspects of a qualifying “housing development project,” including any permits and public improvements required for the project. This exemption applies in all incorporated cities, including charter cities, and in unincorporated “urban areas.”
•Exemptions: 1) Not in certain areas of the Coastal Zone; 2) Not on prime farmland or Farmland of statewide significance; 3) Not on wetlands; 4) Not on a hazardous waste site.
•Doesn’t demolish structures on the national, state, or historic register.
RECENT REFORMS – SB 131
•Trailer budget bill became state law in 2025.
•The “similar in kind” provision was included to prevent clever usage of SB 131 to obtain an exemption for a project for which the near-miss condition would make it unique among the other projects receiving
the same exemption.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report.
19
ITEM 1: PLANNING AND ENV. REVIEW
COMMENTS/QUESTIONS
Thank you
ITEM NO.1 – PLANNING AND ENV. REVIEW
20