HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 97-09; Kelly Ranch; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (17)KELLY RANCH
August 31,1999
Mr. Bill Ponder
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
3111 Camino del Rio North
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108-1725
RE: LCPA 2-99; KELLY RANCH DRAFT STAFF-SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS
Dear Bill:
The City of Carlsbad has provided Kelly Land Company with a copy of your
'draft' Staff-suggested modifications to the Kelly Ranch LCP Amendment.
While Kelly Land Company and the City can agree with the majority of the
suggested modifications, we are very concerned with, and are profoundly
opposed to several of them. This letter will focus on the areas of opposition.
Preface to 'draft' Su ggested Modifications
Coastal Staff will recall the negotiations and settlement approved by the
Commission in 1985 and memorialized in CDP 6-84-617. Commission
findings associated with this permit indicate their conclusion that;
'The Master Plan thus encompasses significant
enhancement and preservation of the sensitive resources
of the site above and beyond what the applicable LCP
documents currently require. When combined with the
offer to dedicate in fee title to a resource agency the
majority of these sensitive areas, and to restrict the uses
allowed on others, these measures provide a mechanism
for long-range preservation of one of the state's highest priority wetland resources.''
The section conclusion states, 'The Commission finds
that in order to accomplish this objective and allow for a
reasonable use of the property, modifications to the
Planned Community Zone regarding agriculture,
maximum residential and commercial development, and
2011 PALOAIAR AIRPORT ROAI). SL~TE 206. CWLSBAD. CA 92009 TFI: [760] 931-1190 FA%: [760] 931-7950
.
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 2
prohibitions of grading on steep slopes are appropriate.
The Commission thus finds the proposed amendments,
as part of the overall development package, to be in
conformance with Section 30007.5 of the Coastal Act.
By any interpretation, in 1985 the Coastal Commission made a deal with the
property owner. Since this time, the required propertv owner provisions of
the deal have been accomplished - fullv, or have been positivelv-modified by
other agencies - pursuant - to their adoption - of more restrictive remlations. As
a result, the Coastal Commission has achieved their benefit from the bargain.
The proposed 'draft' Suggested Modifications however, clearly indicate
Coastal Staff's desire to nullify the Coastal Commission's commitment articulated in the original permit, and impose severe new development
restrictions on the Kelly Ranch project. These Staff proposals are in addition
to all the recent restrictions and environmental enhancements already
imposed by the Resource Agencies and the City.
Kelly land Company, Local, State and Federal governmental agencies and the
community have spent countless hours over the past two years reviewing the original, outdated Kelly Ranch project [approved in the mid-eighties] in order
to finally produce a plan that can meet today's tougher development and
environmental standards. The rigorous development process, which
includes an environmental impact report [on which Coastal Staff declined
substantive comment], produced a development proposal that will finally
allow the completion of this long-dormant and partially complete project. It
is a plan that, because of its sensitive environmental design, its community
contributions, and sound planning and engineering, has been widely
acclaimed by the Resource Agencies and the community as a model project of
the 90's. It is the hope and desire by all that have been involved with the
project's design and approvals to date that Coastal Staff, and ultimately the
Commission will approve the Kelly Ranch project recognizing the following
comments. Responses are numbered in accordance with Coastal Staff Draft
'drafv Suggested Modifications.
Ama Hedionda Land Use Plan
lb]. Kelly Land Company disagrees with the proposal to revise the land use on Area A from the existing RMH to RLM. The existing Coastal Commission
coastal permit for Area A, issued in 1985, allows up to 200 dwelling units on
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 3
this site. The City of Carlsbad, through their Growth Management Plan,
downzoned this number to 111 units in 1987. A further downzoning to RLM
will reduce this number to 31' units. As indicated on page one of this letter,
CDP 6-84-617 and related Commission Findings support the existing RMH land use as consistent with applicable policies. We are aware of no change in
Commission policy since 1985 which justifies such a significant revision to
the Land Use Plan, particularly in light of the pending significant dedications
of open space by the landowner in conjunction with the Kelly Ranch project.
We will, however agree to a downzoning from RMH to RLM on Area C.
&l. recognized that the mound topography dominating Area A is not natural,
and was placed there by a pre-Coastal Commission era construction excavation operation [approximated between 1965 and 19691. The historical
natural landform of Area A is effectively flat.
Kelly Land Company can agree with the subject wording as long as it is
5[cl. Kelly Land Company disagrees that it is appropriate that all streets
within Area A must be public, and without security gates. This proposed
prohibition of security gates ignores the fact that public pedestrian access will
be adequately provided for via a trail to be located within the wetland buffer
of Area A as approved by the CDF&G in the lagoon dedication documents.
We are willing to provide a parking lot for access to the trail immediately east
of Area A [the location of the original lagoon observation kiosk point], in
conjunction with the Area A development. There is no need for redundent
public access within the residential neighborhood of Area A. In addition, the
requirement for public streets is inconsistent with item 4[c], which requires
use of the City Planned Development [PD] standards, and clustered
development. The PD ordinance allows deviation from City public street
standards specifically to accommodate grouping of development within the
most developable areas of a site. Public street standards [wide street widths,
broad minimum radii, long tangents, moderate grades, etc.] result in broad
avenues, a design diametrically opposite to PD clustered development. City
policy does not allow modified design for public streets.
' Growth control point number.
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 4
6[e]. Again, the historical natural landform of Area A is effectively flat. Also, Area A already approximates only 35% of the Kelly Ranch frontage
along Park Drive. The remaining 65% is already unobstructed view corridor. To require that Area A provide an additional 33% view corridor within the
development is excessive in light of this existing dedication of a substantial
view corridor. If the intent is to continue enforcement of the view
preservation program previously approved by the Commission [Kelly Ranch
Master Plan, p. 421, we can concur with the interpretation articulated on page
42. We are concerned that the multiplicity of new regulations and
interpretations articulated in these Draft Suggested Modifications will result
in Area A being effectively undevelopable and contrary to the Commission’s
original intent of development [1985 permit and findings] for Kelly Ranch.
Mello I1 Land Use P lan
l[al and2bl. boundary line and residential zoning for the Callaghan parcel [Area L] for at
least two reasons. First, at the time of the 1985 approval of CDP 6-84-617, a
significant amount of the Kelly Ranch project was designated to be set aside as
open space. Since that time, and in response to the standards applied
primarily by the City, Kelly Land Company has proposed to set aside even
further amounts. Besides the dedication of a larger Lagoon wetland area
[which is already in process], large portions of Area C and the vast majority of
Area F, net upland open space has also increased in the plan, both in quantity
and quality, as wide corridors of open space meander throughout the
property. There has been no change in applicable open space policies to
justify the imposition of still an additional requirement for setting aside al: of
Area L.
Kelly Land Company opposes the elimination of the
Second, Kelly Land Company is subject to certain land rights which were
established by its predecessors in ownership. Among those were the creation of certain rights in documents recorded in the Official Records of San Diego
County for the benefit of [a] the Kelly family, as to Area K and [b] Wayne
Callaghan as to Area L. Those requirements obligate Kelly Land Company to
create legal lots and, concurrent with recordation of Kelly Land Company’s
final map, to convey those legal lots to the Kelly family and Wayne Callaghan
respectively. All of the development planning for the Kelly Ranch project
has contemplated by merely creating those two areas as legal lots, but leaving
Mr. Bill Ponder.
August 31,1999 Page 5
all aspects of future development of those properties to the Kelly family and
to Wayne Callaghan. Accordingly Kelly Land Company objects to this draft
Staff suggested modification.
Ilbl.
Village J will not become an issue. It would be highly unusual for such a site-
specific issue to be addressed in a local coastal program. In addition, this
location has been approved specifically by USF&WS and CDF&G. Modification to this location would require new environmental review, and
modification not only to the Kelly Land Company’s series of permits, but also
to the City‘s regulatory documents, including the General Plan and HMP.
Kelly Land Company is hopeful that the secondary access location to
c.[ll [a]. conservation easements and open space zoning over natural open space
corridors, consistent with the HMP. This is a condition of the City permit,
which Kelly Land Company has accepted. In response to USF&WS/CDF&G
requirements, however, these areas will be deeded to a non-profit natural
resource management company, whose directors include USF&WS and
CDF&G officials. We are informed by the City of Carlsbad that they do not
support City, or City-formed maintenance district management of these areas.
The suggested modification appears to be inconsistent with City and Resource
Agency policy in this regard.
Kelly Land Company supports the concept of providing
7.
City policy which dictates a 20-foot wide zone under circumstances such as the
subject development, wherein all structures are constructed with internal fire
sprinkler system. The City Fire Marshal has determined that the
combination of sprinkler systems with a 20-foot clearcut area results in an
equal level of fire protection as the Staff-proposed 30-foot clear cut program.
Kelly Land Company supports the City Fire Marshal program for fire
suppression.
The suggested 30-foot wide fire suppression zone is inconsistent with
8. coastline, and is on the inland side of the first public roadway. This factor
notwithstanding, the City of Carlsbad has required public pedestrian trails and
sidewalks in two significant locations crossing the site. Public views from
these locations are plentiful. We disagree that additional public vista points
on the Callahan parcel and within Planning Areas I or J are necessary,
particularly considering the provision of the public nature center on Area F.
The Kelly Ranch Core Area project is over one mile inland from the
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 6
9. Kelly Land Company strongly opposes any requirement that the
proposed private drives within the proposed apartment project [Areas D, G
and HI must be public streets, and that privacy gates be prohibited. Due to City
policies regarding public street design [street widths, turning radii, etc. discussed in 5(c) above], this requirement of public street design will render
the apartment project [including the affordable housing component]
impossible. As to the gate issue, Coastal Staff must remember that this site is
situated on the inland side of the first public street, and that public access
policies dictate the access provision "where no otherwise adequate coastal
access exists". Indeed, immediately across the street [on the lagoon side of the
public street] a full public nature center is provided. Indeed, there is adequate
public access to view the lagoon wetlands in various locations. We can think
of no substantive rationale whatsoever that would necessitate full public
access into the apartment project. All other on-site streets including Areas I
and J are proposed as public.
It must be recognized by Coastal Staff that Kelly Land Company has
voluntarily contributed to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation in excess of one acre of land and a 3,800 square foot building for the purposes of the nature center. The nature center's purpose is to provide public access to the
Lagoon; enhance public viewing opportunities; educational experiences;
community meeting areas; and to provide regional recognition of the
important coastal resource: the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The City-issued
coastal permit for this use deleted the previously approved travel service
commercial uses allocated to the site [Area F] through CDP 6-84-617.
A significant feature of 'coastal access' is the construction of Cannon Road
[from El Camino Real to Macario Canyon] linking inland transportation
corridors to the coast. The Kelly Ranch project is instrumental in providing
this important infrastructure link. The Coastal Staff recommendations must
place much weight on this important public access provision and recognize the need to balance project conditions with project feasibility.
Bullet-point 5.
screening setback also. The existing Coastal Commission-issued coastal
permit allows substantially larger [and taller] buildings on the site, and does
not incorporate the 30-foot setback requirement. The proposed project
Kelly Land Company opposes a 3&foot landscape
h
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 7
reduces the number, height and bulk of residential buildings within the
subject area. Rear yards will be fully landscaped. The Final EIR for the new
project concluded that no significant visual impact will result from
construction of the homes with the 20-foot setback. We support the findings
of the EIR and the City of Carlsbad.
Summarv and Conchs ion
As you can see, Kelly Land Company is very concerned with the substance
and tenor of the Draft Suggested Modifications. Our analysis concludes that
the modifications will have the effect of requiring substantial changes to the
plans approved by the City of Carlsbad and the Resource Agencies, and render
the cooperative and lengthy work accomplished to date by Kelly Land
Company, the City, the USF&WS, and CDF&G, effectively without merit.
Additional restrictions have been imposed far in excess of those in CDP 6-84-
617, even though applicable coastal policies remain unchanged.
As we have mentioned, the proposed project is in response to the series of
supplemental, and more restrictive land use regulations adopted by the City
and USF&WS/CDF&G since the original 1985 coastal pennit approval. As
you know, in 1986 the City instituted a comprehensive Growth Management
Program which limits allowable dwelling units [densities], requires
supplemental environmental review and public infrastructure, and
preservation of slopes [constraints mapping]. The City also adopted other
regulatory ordinances, which include additional open space regulations,
require hillside permit review, require affordable housing, more restrictive
planned development requirements, and require public community facilities.
In addition, since the original Coastal Commission approval, other
governmental agencies have adopted policies which affect the project. The
California gnatcatcher was listed in 1993 as a ”threatened” species by the
USF&WS, which culminated in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan
[HMP]. The HMP identifies specific “hard line” open space limits and an
environmental mitigation program for Kelly Ranch. New wetland protection and buffer policies were also adopted by the US Army Corps of
Engineers.
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999
Page 8
The proposed LCP Amendment and coastal permit modernizes development
design of Kelly Ranch into compliance with the more restrictive policies of
the Local, State and Federal governments. It is far more sensitive to the coastal environment than the existing coastal permit. The proposed plan
substantially reduces the intensity of residential development, eliminates
commercial use and replaces it with a nature center, complies with the
Habitat Management Plan, provides affordable housing, ensures far greater
preservation and creation of protected habitat, enhances the wildlife corridor,
provides improved drainage and erosion control protection, and continues to
meet all wetland and protection requirements of the existing [1985] coastal permit.
Kelly Land Company is particularly concerned as to why there is no
acknowledgement of the significant plan improvements, and why the
findings made by the Commission in 1985 for what is clearly a less restrictive plan, now are not supported by Staff for Kelly Land Company’s
environmentally superior plan. The Commission findings in 1985 concluded
that a transfer of development rights’ to upland areas were a desirable trade-
off for “protection of the substantial wetland resources” on the property.
What coastal policv has changed in that this concept - is evidentlv no longer
amlicable? Just as the Staff is concerned that the original Commission-
approved ‘bargain’ and its intent are maintained, so is Kelly Land Company.
Planning agents for Kelly Land Company and the City of Carlsbad have
provided Coastal Staff with a substantial amount of information and analysis
regarding the subject project. We are very disappointed that the proposed project, if burdened with the draft suggested modifications will be unable to
proceed after the years of substantial work by Kelly Land Company, State and
Federal Resource Agencies, and the community. Immediate reconsideration
of your position on the Draft Suggested Modifications as discussed above is
requested. A meeting to fully discuss your suggested modifications should be
scheduled immediately. Please advise me as to the date and time that a
meeting can be scheduled.
* Far greater development rights than those proposed now.
Mr. Bill Ponder
August 31,1999 Page 9
I look forward to your timely response to this matter.
D. L. Clemens
cc: Mayor Claude Lewis
Ray Patchett, City Manager Marty Orenyak, Director of Community Development
Ron Ball, City Attorney
Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director
Chris ter Westman, Associate Planner Deborah Lee, Coastal Commission
Sherilyn Sarb, Coastal Commission
Sheryl Barrett, USF&WS
Jacqueline E. Schafer, CDF&G