HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-02-07; City Council; 3528-8; SAN DIEGO COAST REGIONAL COMMISSION ACTION ON THE AGUA HEDIONDA SPECIFIC PLAN AND FUTURE STATE COASTAL COMMISSION ACTION4
a4 I 0 d) CITY OF CARLSBAD
I
7
L
Initial:
Dept. Hd. <-.e"%
DATE : FEBRUARY 7, 1978 City Atty "5 +d *B AGENDA BILL+ NO. 35a
,
DEPARTMENT': PLANNING City Mgr. I
d
SUBJECT : SAN DIEGO COAST REGIONAL COblMISSION ACTION ON THE AGUA HEDI
SPECIFIC PLAN AND FUTURE STATE COASTAL COblT4ISSION ACTION.
??rxTT$iE!T OF THE MATTER
On December 23, 1977, the San Diego Coast Regional Commission
with conditions, the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan as a segmente
Coastal Program Land Use Plan. There were a number of changes
plan as a result of conditions of approval (see attached analy The Coastal Act provides for an alppeal to the State Commission
Regional Commission's action if portions of the plan are disap
The plan, as approved by the Regional Commission, has been fori
the State Commission and a public hearing has been scheduled f
February 14, 1978 in Los Angeles. Any communication from the 1
Council to the Coastal Commission should be accomplished prior
date.
EXHIBITS
St a f f Ana 1 y s i s
Letter from F. M. Dudley, dated January 20, 1978
RE C OMME N DAT I ON
Staff recommends that the City Council determine if major chanj the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan have been imposed by the Regioi Commission. If so determined, the Council should direct staff
communicate those areas of appeal to the State Commission prioj
the Februaryl4, 1978 p;rblic hearing.
"yrzp dWA 4) k
FORM PLANNING 73
.. e 0
AGENDA BILL NO. 3528 - Supplement #8 -2- February 7, 19
2-8-78 Council directed staff to communicate those areas of appea the State Commission prior to the February 14, '1978 public on the San Diego Coast Regional Commission action. Furthe the State staff makes their presentation with reference to report from E. Jack Schoop, Chief Planner, City staff was to request a continuance in order for staff and Council to and have adequate input prior to any public hearing.
a e
LNE~IO RAN DUM
January 23, 1978
TO : City Council
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: San Diego Coast Regional Commission action on
the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan and future State
Coastal Commission Action
On December 23, 1977, the San Diego Coast Regiorial Commission apprc
the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan as a segmented Local Coastal Prc
land use plan. The following analysis covers the conditions of
approval as adopted by the Regional Commission and staff's
evaluation of these in light of the submitted plan.
Segmentation: The Regional Commission approved segmentation wit1
no conditions.
Land Use Plan
Condition
1. Public Trust Doctrine - Because there exists a question as t
the applicability of the public trust doctrine to several proper
or to portions in the Aqua Hedionda Specific Plan Area, those
properties should not be designated for any incompatible land us
until the State Lands Commission has completed their study of th
area. The comnon law doctrine of public trust easements were
traditionally for the purposes of navigation, commerce and
fisheries; however, the courts (Marks v. Whitney) have identifie1
acceptable uses to inc:Lude other public uses such as recreation
_I
.- e e
ecological preservation.
4
The properties within the ?lanning area where a public trust ea5
may exist are Ecke, Ferrero, L&R partnership, and Kelly. All ar
proposed in whole, or in part for residential development, an
incompatible use for public trust lands. However, the conditio1
uses of aquaculture on the Ecke parcel, and Wildlife Preserve 01:
Kelly property would.be consistent uses with the public trust dc
Residential development, as conditioned, would be permitted on 1
portjws of the Ferrero and L&R Partnership properties that are
to be free from potential public trust encumbrances.
Staff Comment: Staff does not feel that this condition will ha
any negative affect on the intent of the plan. The question of
public trust must be resolved prior to development of any prope
even without this condit-ion.
2. Public Access Provisions - To ensure that adequate public a
is provided along the north shore of the lagoon in conformance
Section 30212, a continuous public access which would also conr
with the Pannonia Property, and which would not adversely imp3.c
the Wildlife Preserve should be provided. If it proves to be
technically infeasible to cross under 1-5 and the railroad trac
the continuity should be provided through adjacent streets. TI
location of the proposed public access easement should be prec:
plotted in respect to the edge of the lagoon at MWHW.
To provide adequate privacy for future residents and to ensure
public's use and enjoyment of the access way, development alon
-2-
0 e
the north shore of the inner 1agoon;whether it be residential
or commercial recreation, should be setback an adequate distance
the inside edge of-the access easement. A preliminary recommend
which would have to be finalized at the time the implementation
phase is approved, for a minimum setback requirement is 50 ft.
25 ft would also be an adequate setback where sufficient vertica
separation exists. (Due to different topographical characterist
only the north shore of the inner lagoon is dealt with here. Ot
conditions will treat the issue of adequate setback from the pub
accessway for those parcels located on the north shore of the mi
and outer lagoons.)
Staff Comment: Staff has no problem with this condition. The
intent of the AHSP desjign standards are essentiallj in conforman
with Condition #2. In regard to the continuous access provision
staff has researched the possibility of a continuous access way
the railroad tracks anr7 1-5 and found it infeasible. If the
Commission wishes to study access feasibility further, they shou
perform the analysis. Possibly, their relationship with other
State agencies would produce more positive results.
-3-
' 3. -_l-___-lL-I Design Considations _I - Tnc design critee section should b
deleted from the Land IJse Plan phase, and should be revised and
snbmitted along with the ordinance/implementation phase of the
Agua Hedjonda Speci-fic-Plan. Instead of design criteria propose
in the plan, design goals are established for individual parcels
where appropriate, through the conditions OF approval. The desi
criteria which will be submitted in the second phase should be
drafted to implement the conditioned design goals. For illustra
purposes only, examples of potential appropriate design criteria
are indicated here.
It is acknowledged that the design goals established in the con(
of approval may, on certain parcels, reduce achievable densitier
below that proposed in the Specific Plan. Should it be shown dl
-4-
the preparation 0 01.. the implementation 2hase @ the Specific p1c
that the conditioned design goals will result in reduced densit
when the density designations should be appropriately reduced.
no direct incompatibility between the proposed densities and Cc
Act policies exists on all parcels, the density designations oi
the Plan should accurately reflect development expectations.
Design Criteria - Examples
Parking - as per interpretive guidelines
Height - 2-story - outer and middle laqoon, and those portion:
- 1-story above Adams Street - inner laqoon
inner lagoon along Park Drive.
(clustering of development should be utilized
along inner lagoon to provide view corridors)
Setback - 50 feet from'inside edqe of public access easement -
inner lagoon, 25 when sufficient vertical separation
exists.
- 25 feet from inside ec'tqe oi public access easement -
middle lagoon
- 20 feet from bluff edge - outer lagoon (alternatives to the above example setbacks could be achieved throuqh landscaping and/or decreasing
the height of the first tier of development)
Staff Comment: Although it would be more appropriate to consic
specific design standards at the implementation staye of the
LCP process, staff does not object to the design criteria for
illustrative purposes only.
I
4.- North - Shore Parcels Adjacent to and east of Carlsbad
Boulevard - To protect the scenic and visual qualities of Carl
Boulevard, a major coastal access route, and Carlsbad State Bel
development on the bluff-top parcels abutting Carlsbad Bouleva
to the east should be sited and designed to be compatible with
-5 -
e a
visual character of the a.rca. To achieve tnis objective, cons:
with Section 36251 of' the- Act, development shculd be setback a
sufficient distance from Carlsbad Boulevkrd to ensure the prov:
of an adequate landscape buffer, and should be low-profile to (
that no adverse visua.l impacts will result.
Staff COment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
5.
LaqoGn -- - To protect the viewshed of the outer lagoon, developml
on the subject parcel. should be unobstrusive in size and locat
The achievement of this standard, which would be consistent wi
Section 30251 of the Act, requires that development be setback
a sufficient distance from the bluff edge to ensure the provis
of an adequate landscape buffer, and be.low-profile to ensure
that no adverse visual impacts wt1.1. :,:esult.
San Uiqo Gas _-.._-__ and. Electric Parcel - North Shore Outer
Staff Comment: Staft' has no objection to this. condition.
6. Ecke Parcel - Because of the presence of such natural and
made attributes as suitable water quality, protection from oce
currents and wave action, and the proximity of the thermal eff
of the Encina Power Plant, the Ecke parcel should be reserved
aquaculture use consistent with Section 30255 of the Act. Sai
use shall stand until- it has been shown throuqh an objective s
that aquacultural use of the site is infeasible.
economic feasibility,, other criteria that should be studied
include impact upon public access, visual character, and water
quality. If it is determined, based upon but not limited to t
above criteria, that aquaculture is not feasible, then the des
In addition
- 6--
0 a may be amended to another use consistent with Coastal Act requi
ments. The lcasibility study shall be prepared by an independe
consultant approved by the City of Carlsbad at such time develo
ment is proposed. Whiile the feasibility of aquaculture is bein
investigated, interim uses such as recreation (camping, fishing
that would necessitate a minimal capital investment and disturb
02 the site would be permiQted.
Staff Comment: StafY has no objection to this condition.
7. Papagayo .- With the objective of protecting the viewshed of
the middle lagoon in EL manner consistent with Section 30251 of
Act, development should be sited and designed to be visually
unobtrusive. To achieve this goal, development should be setba
a sufficient distance from the inside edge of the Proposed acce
easement to ensure the provision of an adequate landscape S.J..FF~
and be low-profile to ensure that no adverse visual impacts wil:
result.
To take advantage of the recreational potential of the site and
comply with Section 30221 of the Act, a $ acre over-look park
located on level land previously dedicated should be provided
near the cul-de-sac of Harbor Drive. Additional recreational
facilities which would be warranted in respect to the access anc
recreation policies of the Act include a public access stairway
to the water's edge, and provisions for fishing.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
8. Snug Harbor - To preserve oceanfront land suitable for
recreation pursuant to Section 30221 and to balance the amount
-7 -
0 *
of new resideiit-ial development with recreation pursuant to Sect
30252(6) of the Act, that area which lies between the eucalyptu
grove and the Hoover Street access should be reserved for
recreation. Although public recreation would be preferable,
commercial recreation would also be acceptable under Coastal Ac
* policies.
Proposed development should be sited and designed to protect thc
viewshed of the lagoon, to provide views from Adams Street, and
ensure the use and enjoyment of the public access way proposed
along the edge of the lagoon. To achieve this goal and consist(
with the Coastal Act, development should observe adequate setbac
from the access easement, should be low-profile, and should be
clustered to ensure adequate view corridors.
Staff COInment: The submitted plan shows the area between the
eucalyptus grove and the Hoover Street access GS residential
(Residential Medium R-M -- density 4-10 du per acre). Conditio1
#8 will delete the RM designation and require a tlrecreationalll
designation for this site. The City Council has previously
expressed opposition to the establishment of "public" recreatior
in this location during the public hearing process. Other
recreation designations have not been discussed.
-8-
9.
designed and located so that the visual character ofi the lagoon
preserved, the a3teration of natural land forms is minimized, vi
from Adam Street are protected, and the use and enjoyment of th
public access way proposed along the edge of the lagoon is ensuz
To achieve this goal and consistency with the Coastal Act, devel
ment should observe adequate setbacks from the access easement,
should be lcw-profile, and should be clustered to ensure the prc
vision of useful view corridors. Grading and desiqn guidelines
should be developed so that the disturbance of natural land forr
minimal and structures are located and designed to fit natural (
--- Hediorida Poin I @ Developmcnt along Hedioa Point should be .
Staff Comment: staff has no objection to this condition.
I\
0 *
10. Bristol Cove - With the objectives of protecting coastal
aesthetics and providing for traffic safety, development in nri
Cove should be prohibited from providing parking that necessitz
backing out on to the street. A single-driveway with adequate
on-site turn around would contribute to traffic safety, and WOL
provide room for buffler landscaping.
Sf?ff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition. - --
11. Ferrero and L&R Partnership Properties (North Shore) -
Presuming that no claim of public trust is found to exist by St
Lands on all, or a portion of the Ferrero and L&R properties,
special provisions are necessary to ensure that development doc
not adversely impact the natural resources and visual integritl
the adjacent Wildlife Preserve. To be compatible with the adjz
lagoon and Wildlife Preserve and to achieve consistency witF. Cc
30240(b) of the Act, atdequate buffers to development must be
provided, and the size and height of development must be at a
compatible scale. These buffers may include adequate landscapj
or fencing and shall ‘be addressed in the ordinance implementatj
phase of the LCP.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
12. Low - and Moderate Income Housing and Recreational Facilitic
Ta ensure that the provision of low and moderate cost’housing c
recreational facilities has been appropriately considered as ?e
Section 30213 of the Act, specific provisions must be included
the Plan. If it is intended that provisions for lower cost hot
opportunities will be made in other areas of the community, thc
-10-
a e details of those provisions and supporting rationale should he
included in thge plan at this time. Also, if it is intended th,
the existing housing stock south of Tamarack and west of I-.”, i:
to be preserved to meet the intent of Section 30213, that too 1
be specified.
Staff Comment: Staff indicated to the Regional staff and Commi
that low and moderate income housing provisions were intended
satisfied by opportunities in other areas of the community and
suggested the following wording for the condition which would
clarify the City’s position:
Low and Moderate Inccme Housing - As the Aqua Hedionda Specifi
Plan intends to ensure the provisions of low and moderate cost
housing with existing programs, a statement to this intent sho
be included in the Specific Plan. The program that will satis
Section 33213 of the Act including the following should apF-’sI
in the Specific Plalz.
- Over 200 units of subsidized housing (Section 23 and Section
currently exist in the City west of I-5. 101 of the units a
for families, and 103 units are for senior citizens.
- The City has had its own Housing Authority for approximately
seven years which manages the Section 23 and Section 8 progr
- A $103,000 blcck grant has recently been approved for the
rehabilitation of low and moderate cost owner occupied units
The target area for the block grant is also west of I-5 wher
potential units have been identified.
13.
the Pannonia property approximately at midpoint, the land use
designation of 0-4 d.u./ac. should remain. However, to provid
more housing opportunities in the coastal zone and to achieve
greater compatibility with Section 30250 of the Act which call
the concentration of development, that area south of the prop0
Pannonia - North of proposed Hillside Drive which cuts ac
- 11 -
0 e
arterial'should be increased to a maximum density of 10 d.u./ac.
provided that it can be shown that the capacity of adjacent strc
will be sufficient.to accommodate the increased traffic qenerati
Should it be shown that available street capacity does not exist
the density designation should be reduced to an appropriate lev(
A 5 acre dedication for park use is also required, and would be
CohsistOnt with Section 30221 of the Act which calls for the prc
tion of suitable oceanfront property for recreation, and 30256(
which requires that new residential development be balanced wit
recreation.
,
Staff Comment: Staff does not object to this condition, totall
however, it was made clear to the Regional Commission that base
related traffic analysis, it was felt that an increase in dcnsi
would definitely have a negativs effect on adjacent residential
streets. Also, staff does not feel than an arbitrary five acre
park dedication should be required at this stage in the plannin
process. The City does not have the ability to guarantee a fiv
acre park at the subject location at this time. In addition, t
are numerous physical and site design considerations which may
alter future park design to the point that- five acres may not L
appropriate or necessary.
..
- 12 -
0 0 14. Kelly Property I_ - To pzeserve the maxj-muni amoc:?t of wet]-and
habitat area, and to achieve consistency with Sections 30233 (c)
and 30240 of the Act which require the maximum protection for SI
wetland habitats, those portions of the Kelly property proposed
residential development should be designated for inclusion in t
Wildlife Preserve in their natural, or restored state, (The ab
condition is intended to be consistent with the boundaries prop
fiy the nepartment of Fish and Game.)
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
15. Wildlife and Habitat - Preservation - - In the event that the
City's proposal- for the acquisition of the Wildlife Preserve is
not successful, more (explicit language should be included in tI-
- 13 -
0 e Plan to show how the underlying zoning would be consistent wit1
the Coastal Act poiicies that require preservation of sensitivc
.,vetland habitats.
If it can be demonstrated to the Commission that greater protec
of the eel grass habitat in the western cove of the inner lagoc
is warranted, then a speed corridor from the marina to the mair
body of thc inner lagoon which would be compatible with contin1
water skiing use should be established in cooperation with the
State Department of Fish and Game. Alternatives to the speed (
ridor would be the prlotection of an equivalent habitat in anotl.
area, or some other acceptable solution to the Department of Fi
and Game that would nlot interfere with water skiing.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this objection.
16. Commun;ty Park - To achieve consistency with Section 30241
of the Act which provides for the preservatioi-4 of prime agricul
lands and Section 30240(b) which requires that new development
sited to prevent degradation of sensitive resource areas, the
proposed park concept should be revised to include only those 1
that would require minimal site disturbance, and would be
compatible with resource protection (e.g. passive uses such as
picnicinq, trails, and pocket beaches). The revised park uses
also be located so that no conversion of agricultural lands WOL
be necessitated.
Access to the passive recreation area could be provided by boat
by a pedestrian/bike trail that would connect with Cannon Road
(existing) or Kelly Drive, provided that no conversion of
- 14 -
0 0 agricultural lands is necessitated.
1
Staff Comment: 2'-5is condition is marqixiall y acceptable only
because a specific park pian has not beea finalized. Staff,
however, does not feel that the minimal amount of agricultural
cqnversion necessary for possible park development would
constitute a violation of the Coastal Act. Staff feels that
the trade-off of a small amount of agricultural land to provide
increased coastal related recreational opportunities for the
entire community and region is appropriate under the Act.
17. Cannon Road and Kelly Drive Connection - The proposal for
Canncn Road shall be 'deleted from the Agua Hedionda Specific PI
geographic segment. [Consideration of Cannon Road shall occur E
such time the LCP for the remaining areas of Carlsbad is submit
to the Corovi-ssion for review.
The proposed extension of Kelly Drive should be revised in cool:
with the Department of Fish and Game to reflect the larger Wilc
Preserve Area. In addition, the bike route proposal which cro:
the Wildlife Preserve should be relocated in cooperation with 1
and Game to ensure th(at no sensitive habitat is adversely impac
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to the condition in regal
to Kelly Drive. The Regional Commission's rationale for not
considering Cannon Road as proposed in the AHSP was that its
extension could negative1 y affect the Agricultural lands to the
south (outside the plan area). They, therefore, elected to
postpone action until consideration of the properties to the
south could be includ<ed in the decision making process. Becau:
-15-.
0 0
the Coastal Act- ,is extremely specific aboui the conversion of
agricultural iands anywhere in the Coastal zone, staff does not
feel as though any addi-tiondl powers or insight will be availabl
to the Regional Staff or Commission at a later date. Staff
supplied extensive evidence from experts supporting the necessit
for Cannon Road extension and felt as though a decision coyld
have L-en made at the time of final vote.
18. Agricultural Conversion Criteria - - T'o be consistent with tl-
objective of the Coastal Act to protect agricultural lands in tE
coastal zone, the specific plans conversion criteria for the
south shore agricultural lands should be revised to be consistei
with that found in Sections 30241 and 30242 of the Act. Also,
it should be more clearly demonstrated that the "oper, space"
designation ic. appropriate to protect the agricultural lands ir
manner consis.tent withL the agricultural policies of the Act, or
whether another designation, such as one permitting agriculture
support facilities exclusively would be appropriate.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
19, San Diego Gas and Electric Company - Commercial Property -
protect and preserve prime agricultural lands in the coastal zc
consistent with Section 30241 of the Act, the.subject site shol
be designated for continued agricultural production rather tha
for commercial use.
Staff Comment: This condition is in direct conflict with the
- - 16
0 0
designated land use on the plan. The basis for placing the comm,
oial designation OR the subject site was Chat commercial activi
would constitute a logical extension of the existing development
(r.?r Country) to the south, and that regional level access is
readily ajj-ilable off the I-5 freeway with an established on-ram
off ramp.
The provision of commercial activities at this location, especia
that portion of the site near or adjacent to the south shore of
the lagoon, would increase the availability of the lagoon for pu
use. If, for example, coastal dependant recreational activities
were developed on some of the property, the lagoon would be bett
utilized and no negative impact on north shore residential areas
would res111 t .
I
200 Runoff, Grading, S.iltation - The Specific Plan requires si:
traps, settling basins, and other grading controls during and a
construction. Specific criteria shall be outlined in the ordin;
implementation phase of the LCP.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
-17-'
e 0
21.
commercial/private boat launching facilities and to achieve grel
consistency with Section 30224 of the Act, provisions for alter
commercial and/or private boating facilities should be deleted
from the plan. Also, with the exception of Bristol Cove, the P
should state that no new private dockinq facilities should be a
Boat Launching Facilities - To avoid a prolifcraticn of
bL:*rf -__I_ COlnmeIlt: Staff advised the Regional Staff and Commission
numerous times that this condition was not necessary because of
a typographical error in the plan text. The originally submitt
Specific P1 an documen tt iden ti f ied potential commerci a1 /pri va te
launching facilities in error.
launching facilities".
condition.
The text should have read "pub1
As a result, staff has no objection to
22. Wj-ndfhiljWipeout Provision - TG be consistent with constit
- 18 -
0 0
law, the following statenent shoald be deleted:
"In instances where there is a clear and measurable
loss of value to the owner and a definite ghin in value to the pu'blic, some form of compensation
should be considered. I'
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
23, Ai>r-cqtion -_ of Navigable Channels and Maintenance Dredging
To ensure that tl~c waters and habitats of Agua Hedionda Lagoon
protected, the section of the plan dealing with the alteration
navigable channels on Page 19 should be revised to be consister
with appropriate Coastal Act policies.
In respect to the maintenance dredging of the inner lagoon, bo1
should be established around sensitive resource areas (Wildlift
Preserve) to ensure their protection. The Department of Fish i
Game shoulJ be consulted in the estaulishment of said dredqiy
boundaries.
Staff Comment: Staff has no objection to this condition.
ACTION OF STATE COASTAL COMMISSION
On February 14, 1978, the State Commission will hear the AHSP
in Los Angeles. The purpose of the hearing will be to determi
whether there are "substantial issues" as to the conformity of
the Regionally approved plan with the policies of the Coastal
If no "substantial issues" are found, the plan is deemed certi
If issues are found, a subsequent hearing will take place on
!larch 14, 1978, and the plan will be acted upon at this point.
-19-,
0 0
-- CITY COUNCIL - ACTION -
After final Coastal Coinmission action, if the Commission apprGve
the plan, there is an additional City Council action necessary.
Because the Council has only adopted the AHSP in concept, the
cL..I”. - - I1 must approve the plan officially. Once this occurs, st;
will begin tile implementation stage of the approved plan.
I€ the Council wishes to direct communication to the State Coas
Commission regarding any aspect of the Recxionally approved plan
they should direct staff to proceed with the correspondence pri
to the February 14 meeting.
Section 30512(b) of the Coastal Act provides that where a land
use plan is disapproved, in whole or in part, the Regional
Commission ikiUSt submit a written explsnation (which was accompl
through an attached summary) and suggest ways in which to modij
the plan (which the conditions of approval do). This section c
the Act also provides that the local government may appeal the
disapproved portion of the plan to the State Commission.
TCH : le
Attachment: Letter from F.M. Dudley dated January 20, 1978
I - 20 -
0
SARI DIEGO GAS & ELECTRK corwI: P.X
P 0 BOX 1831 LAN DIELO CALIIOIINIA '3211? , 17141 732-4252
FILF NoCAI
January. 20, 1978
Mayor and City Council
CLt-., ?f Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Attention: Paul Bussey
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
City Manalger
On December 23, 1977, the San Diego Coast Regional Commission approved portions of the City of Carlsbad's Agua
Hedionda Specific Plan which corLatitutes the first segment of
your City's Local Coa,stal Progrnm. The Commission 011 that datt
denied certain portions of the plan that had been previously approved by the Council. Included in chose denials, the Com- mission, by a 5 to 4 vote, reject&. the City's recommended
Commercial designation for SDG&E's 45 acre parcel at the inter- section of Canncn Road end 1-5, and instead recommended that.
the property is located at the intersection of a major freeway
interchange, and would constitute an orderly extension of commercial uses now established by Car Country, imrnediately adjacent and south of the parcel, we believe, as did the Counci in approving the lznd use plan, that a corrmercial zsc is the mc
appropriate use for this land.
. this parcel be designated for agricu1tur;l use. Because
The Council is well aware of the contributions
that SDGStE has made in the Agua Hedionda Lagoon area for the benefit and enjoyment of the citizens of Carlsbad. These uses
include Cannon Park, ;two ocean beach areas, a fishing beach on
the outer lagoon, uses of the inner and middle lagoons, and thc proposed Hub Park,
The Council is also aware that the City's previously approved specific plan for SDGhtE's property identifies the arez
south of the inner lagoon as a future power plant site. Becau:
of the Council's concerns, SDG&E agreed to accept the Commercie designation of a 45 acre portion of the site in lieu of the
designation of the entire site for power plant use.
Ah. l&V[ 'I /I J/( I lbbY/ /) ( f I/ i t Ji(il /I J'i
January 20, 197f 0 -2- e 1 Paul Bussey
The 'Regional Ccrnmissiorb hzs madc its decision withor
Tt is surely just this kind of result benefit of the historical perspective shared by the Carlsbad
City Ccuncil a?ll SDG&E.
that Section 30004(a)' of Lhe Coastal Act seeks to aT:oid, by directing the Coastal- Commission to rely heavily on local
government and local land use planning procedures in their
actions concerning local coastal programs.
actiw.
the State 'Zmstal Conmission an appeal from the San Diego Coas Regional Cormission's denial of the City's land use designatic on the 45 acre parcel. necessary in order that this issue and others may receive dire
attention during State Commission hearings on this project.
SDGStE strongly opposes the Regional Commission's
We respectfully request that the Council direct to
An appeal is both appropriate and
gincerely , I I'
j' !. '\( i + f L\y\t;L,\ i )t (- \'L 'b
F. M. Dudley
Land Planning Supervisor
FMD : dr cc: Jim Hagaman Plannsncj Director, City of Carlsbad
-- _-_- -...-.. . --. .V .. .- YU,.II.I.CI",",I ,,.w-c-u-.u
woo
'\, > woward Street, San Francisa, 94105 - (415)
I.
To: lX'ERESTED PAIZTIZS
From:
Subject:
E. JACK SCHOOP, CHLEF PLANNELS
Fkblic Hearing on Agua Hedionda Speoific Plan, City of Carlsbad an Diego County)
The City of Carlsbad hals asked the Commission to consider the City's Agua
Hedionda Specific Plan as a segnent of the City's overall coastal plan, and to
approve the Agua Hedionda plan as meetin-g the requirements of the Coastal Act of 1976. The City's request,s have been approved, subject to conditions, by th
San Diego Regional Co.mmissioi~. The purpose of the State Commission's review i
(1) plan, as approved subject to the Regional Comnission's conditions, meets the r
quirements of the Coastal Act. A public hearing on the matter will be held as follows :
to act on the request for segmentation and (2) to determine whether the
Date: February 14, 1978
Time: 1 p.m.
Place: Airport Narina Hotel
$601 Lincoln Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90045
Persons wishirig to testfify on this matter may appear at the hearing or ma;
present their concerns by letter to the Commission on or before the hearing
date, Copies of all correspondence Will be provided to the Commission, may submit written coments of any length; oral testimony may be linrited to f2
minutes for each speaker.
You
STAFF RECCXWEXD-TION
The staff recomrnends that, at the Commission meeting of February l4, 1978
Approve the request of the City of Carlsbad to submit its Agua Hediont
Plan as a segment of its total Local Coastal Trogram, in accordance with the f:
ings set forth below; and
the Commission:
1.
2. FXnd that specific mpects of the Agua Hedionda Plan, as prepared by
the City and approved, subject to conditions, by the San Diego Regional Commis: raise a. substantial issue as to corSormity with the policies in Chapter 3 of tl
Coastal Act, requiring a decision by the State Commission.
(The San Diego Regional Commission reviewed the proposed plan thorcughly i
carefully, and approved it subject to a number of important conditions.
staff believes, however, that, because this is the first land use plan to be SUI
mitted for approval by any lctcal government in the coastal zone, and because ti
Commission's actions with regard to it will be viewed as establishing precedenl . both as to the interpretation of certain Coastal Act policies and as to the le1
of specificity and detail required in the land use porLion of a hcal Coastal 1 gram, there is a substantial issue warranting State Cornmission review of this I
The
+ c- .. TABLF; OF CONTDRS
Area Descrciptiqn
Part I: Geographic Sep;mentation
I, Background
II. SurrounwAxea
111 . Regional Commission Action
IV. Staff Recommendatfon
Part, 2:
I. Background
II.
SII. Summary of Land Use Plan
'IVe
V, Staff Pnalysis: Substantial Issue and Preliminary Recommendations
Review of Agua Hedionda Specific Plan
SignLficance of Approval. of Land Use Plans
Major Permit Deci:;io& in the Agua Hedionda Iagoon Area
.. A. Commerci,d.Recreation Use of Shoreline
Be Agricultural Land Conversion
C.
D.
E. Degree of Specificity Required
Use and Restoration of Wildlife Areas
Grading Controls and Flood Plain Protection
1. Overall Pulbic Access CQndLtions
2.
3.
View Protection and Design Issues
Specific Parcel by Parcel Access and Design Recormnenc
\ e- ' 0
' AREIl DESCElzIiyTIOW. .
The Agua Hedionda Specific Plan (NSP) area is located primaril.y p5thj-n the
Carlsbad in north Sa Ezgo County? a small portion is in UniAcoqorated c(
territory. The area includes the Agua HedLonda Lagoon md its largely-unde coastal viexshed, as well as the Agua Hedionda Creek flood pl&n east of th
to the coastal zone bomdzi?~ a5 El Canrino Real. The Agua Hedimda lagoon i.
of the 19 coastal wetlads indentified in the De.=lci_rtxent of Fish ad Gure's
entitled: "Acqu.isitic;n Priorities for Coastal Xetlands in Calif.." thus re
spkcial protection by the terns of Section 30233(c) of the Coastal. Act.
The Agua Hedioncla Lagoon has been extensively modified by man to create a '
like area. The railroad 'bri6ge was constructed across it around the turn I - the century, followed by the construction of old U.S. IaLghway 101, EOW Car Blvd., across its mouth. In 1954, the Sa Eego Gas and Electric Co. (SIX
dredged the lagoon to provide cooling water for its "wncka power plant. M
recently, Lrterstate 5 was coqleted, resrilting in division of the lagoon
three interconnected bodies of xater with about 230 acres of open water .ar
and 200 acres or" salt marsh ad mud flats.
Today, the outer lagoon (between Carlsbad 8lvd., and the railroad tracks)
maintaked by SXB at depths of 8 to 12 ft. by periodic dredgkg.
provides cooling water for the &cina power plant. plant is used for acyadture experkents ir?. the outer lagoon ad then is
charged across the beach into the ocean. public recreational fist.Lr?g place, xith a puG1ic fishir4 area pmv5ded by
The r&,dle.lzzoon between the railroad and 1-5 is small a~d shallow,
modates a X4C.A aquatic 2acLUty under lease frcm SCCB; zcz-?or.rersd boats
s-? a% dlowed h it,
.
T55s a
The warm effluent from
The outer lagoon Is also a popul
Xt i
The imer l2,aocc (east of 1-5) includes the largist open water area, as we host 100 acres of mzrshes and nrud flats. It is the regon's only shelter
area north or" Kission Bay where water skiing ad motor f;oaEAx me allowed.
about l96O,%.stol Cove was dredged cut of dry land cn the north side of th lagoon at the lower end of a natural &aLninge ccurse into ths lagoon; 5%
substantial siltation 2nd rmrst be d-edged aut eve-ry one to t.vo years. 3x5s
Covs was envisioned BS a high density resideztial area *&th pfivate docks a sect water access to the lagoon for its residents --
we most 02 the &te=tion of Agua Hec-Eonda has been 5h the fom of dredg
Some fi7liT has occurred iq more recent years on its r,orth Shore easi of 3
Cove, on what nay be public tzxit lands.
Most of the marshes and inud flats of the inner lagoon are coxsidered to be
value habitats by the State Departnext of ?ish and Cwne, and serve, &?ox c
things, as nesting areas for several ezxiangereti qecies, L~clud2-g the Ilea2 ad :$bite '!hi2 :Kites and Eeld.kg*s Savama Sparrow. %ne reminbg WethId5
near Park Crive, have becme somewhat degraded, but aro corsidered by fish dafe e.peri;s to be reacELy restarable. Imec5atel;r east Of the wetlulc
the flooc$~lxh of the dgua. Bedionda Creek, are valuable hrld habi%ats as dC on the City*s SI2 or its SpeciZLc Plan.
--
--
- 1-
e. 0 An important ecolagicdl feature of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon is the exh
, eelgrass beds that have colonized the lagoon to-depths d0.m to 10 feet is found in the outer and middle lagoon and around the edges of the wes
of the inner lagoon. The extensive fish populations that, characterize
aredue, in no small. measure, to these prolific eelgrass beds,
The Lagoon's water surface and south shore are in the City of Carlsbad
by SDG&E. XG!cF, leases the water surface of the Lagoon to Carlsbad for
purposes for $1 a year. Other thm the Encina power plant site west of south shore of the lagoon is under m agricultural lease for tomato prc
The east end of the AHSP area is under one ownership, a significant por is in the unincorporated County area. Ownership of the north shore, a1
is in the City of Carlsbad, is more fragmented and is the most subject .
development pressures. The north shore contains-flat land as Will as s-
areas adjacent to the lagoon. Only the middle lagoon and Bristol Cove I
far been committed to rlesidential development, On theinner lagoon, thr
mall existing commercial.-recreational developments, bcluding the only boat launching ramp at Snug Harbor. The remainder of the north shore-
suited for residential imd additional commercial-residential developmend
I
-2-
e. 0
PART 1
Geographic Segmentation
- e.
GEDGRAF'HIC SmmATION
e.
I.-- BP~~GFK~IND:
Section 30511 (c) of the Coastal. Act of 1976 provides that local cox
grams may be submitted to the Commission: "In separate geographic u2: sisting of less than the local governmentps jurisdiction lying witk
coastal zone,, .... provided that the Commission finds that the meas proposed for separate review cm be analyzed for potential cumulative of development on coastal resources and access independently of the I of the affected jurisdiction."
The Agua Hedionda Specific Plan (AHSP) is the product of one of the J
projects initiated by the Commission in early 1976. Its boundary wa: ated so that the curmilative impacts of development within the Coastd the Lagoon's resources and on access to its shoreline could be consic
First a l,?W acre study area was delineated. It encompassed the ent
goon, its tributary Agua Hedionda Creek floodplain to the Coastal Zor
q, and most of its viewshed. The tvstudy area" also included all of elements of the circulation system affecting access to and along the shore and the nearby ocean beaches at Carlsbad State Beach.
Based on an initial evaluation of the circulation system capacity anc ment potential, the %tudy area1* was reduced to the "planning area" ( mately 1150 acres),
goon itself; the Agua Hedionda Creek fpoopl2in to the Coastal Zone bc
and the areas physically ad visually most directly related to the Lz most subject to the development pressures. -bit #I. shows the "stt s*planning?p area boundaries.
As presented to the Conrmission, the AH= includes areas under the jut
of both the City of Carlsbad and the County of Sa Diego. The Count2
included in the Specific Plan study because it has always been regmc
has more recently become the policy of the County, that these lands P
unincorporated islands within the City of Carlsbad will not be develc
they are annexed to the City. Although officials of the County of ,Sz were aware of the AH3 study, they were not actively hvolved in it.
In a letter- dated November 10, 1977, the County's Assistant Chief Adn tive Officer for Integrated Planning notified the Commission that it and County Counsel's opinion that the County cannot delegate'its plar powers and responsibilities by allowing Carlsbad to submit an LCP 201 County land adjacent to it. The letter further said %he "it was the of the Board of Supervisors that the City do the staff work in prep& UP for the unincorporated islands within the City which would then 1 corporated and submitted as part of the County*s LCP for certifLcatic
Sect to the public hearing and decision making responsibilities of ti
. This Agua Hedionda Specific Plan area includes:
11. pmuNDmG .Am&:
To the north, the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan area is bounded by the urbanized areas of Carlsbad. East of the freeway and in the Coastal
are residmtial areas. West of 1-59 most which is in the Coastal Zor
residential areas and the old downtown, much of which may be includec
Cityts redevelopnent project area now in its early formativs stages.
-
-3 . .-
'. South of the Speak Plan areap east to El-Car& Real, are a 350 acr
Williamson Act agricultural preserve and nostly open Lads which exten
Batiquitos Lagoon some 2 miles south. That area consists of interinixe and County territory and includes leapfrog pockets of residential deve
the Palomar AjrT)oITt, limited industrial park land, agriculture and othe lZEldS.
In, - REGIONAL CCX*C.IISSION ACTION:
On December 23, 1976 the San Diego Coast Reg5.onal Comxissian endorsed mittal of the AHSP lying within the City of Carlsbad as a separate gec
segnent of the CityTs LCP, .ad recorriinended that the State Commission i such segmentation with the following cmditian:
I, The proposal for Cannon Road shall. be deleted from the Agua
Hedionda Speci.fic Plan geographic segment.
Cannon Road skiall. occur at such time as the LC€' for the remain
5ng polrtion (E;) of Carlsbad is submitted to the Commission for review ,
Considerati an of
Staff Notes:
The deletion of Cannon Road at this time appears to be an issue in cei the Specific Plan and not a concern related to geographic segmentatior
deletioa was properly rewed as condition #l7 ofthe Re@ond- Cod:
approved of the Speci2ic Plan. Therefore, staff recornends that the i segmentation con(Etiori #l be deleted,
rv, STAFF mm~mnxrIoN OF SEGEKCATION: _-
A. A~proval. Staff recommends that the ComLssion approve the segmer of the Agua Hedionda :Zpecific Plan area lying within the City of Carl:
the grounds that the segment meets the requirements of Section 30511 the Coastal Act of 19'76.
Be Findings:
1, C08sta.l Resources,
a) Wetlands and Habdtat Protection, All of the Agua Hedionda Lag1 marshes and mudflats, and its tributazz floodpld including t'
Hedionda Creek to the Coastal Zone boundary at El Camino Real, cluded within the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan. Portions -of th and mudflats and a majority of the upland floodplain are in Co
ritary, While these areas cvlnot be certified as submitted by of Carlsbad at this time, the cumulative impacts of the lirr&te
id development and use of them will remain under Cornmission j. ion until the remainder of the City's and County LCP EL* certi
therefore, dl not impair the Com6ssion~s ability to analyze
potential cumulative impacts from xithin the Coastal Zone on t goon resources independently of the remaindeT of the City and
County jurisdiction.
Ln addition, Ziince the entire Lagoon is within this segment, t
mulative effects of boating, dredging and human intrusion impa it can be analyzed within this segment,
8 -4-
e- .. b) Fisual Resarlrces - Much of the Lagoonws undeveloped views
within the Agua Hedionda Segment. Development iqacts on -ty of the scenic resources are localized and contine
this segmenl;.
- . .. __ - _. .-*-- -
c) A,&cuIturdl Protectton. The existing ad potential agricu within the proposed segmnt iFre the Pannonia parcel ad the
on the Lagoon' s south shcrs All of SE&XTs la-d on the so1 that are in agriculture, ad vhich zre a part, of the sub-re) . z5dture corqlex, are included in this segment. Inclusion
parcels in %Iris segment will enable the Corrimission to consic their proposed lad use designations for consistency xith tl
302+1-2 of the Act, If it determines that the cumdative 2
proposals for these parcels must be considered as a part of sub-region& a@cultme complex, Lt could delay-the* ce-rt: impose appropriate conditions of appmvs , merefore, 'inc~i two agriculture parcels 5n the Agua Hedionda segment will .c( the CommEssianTs ability to analyze the cumulztive inpacts ( men% on coastal resources znd coast& access independent of der of the local jurisdiction.
2- Coastal Access:
The Agua Hedionda segrzerrt ir-cludes 1?7. of the 5innecIiate shoselbe I
public stxets par&kl to the Ag~a Hedionda Lagoon. Therezore, ptd to the Lagoon from the nearest pxbEc roaciway can be arxLLyzed in&!!
the renain&r of Carlsbzdts jurisdLction.
As described zbove, the Ostudyrt ad **Ppam5ngBg area boundaries wa?
based on consideration of the elements of the s~ouzlding circulak pvTCting access to the Lagoon for Carlsbad residents and visitors orrt the regon and 'beyond. Therefor%, the currrulatit-e inpacts of Ctc an access to the Lagoon can be mzilyzed within the segmnt Fnd-p p enc
remainder of Carlsb ad' s juris&ction.
3. Elir&nation of U&ccJmorated Comtv Pzsa
The County area elimizmked from the Specific Ean area Is witkin tl
Zone snd the Cormnission, bgretainhg jurisdktion over it, can.er,si
adverse hipacts on the Lagoon resowces or on access to it would 81 tS its certificatfon as a part of the Comtyts UP for the area,
-5-
e.
PART 2
Review of Agua Hedionda Specific Plvn
0. e
r. BACKGROUND
The City of Carlsbad (Sztn Diego County) has recpllested the Coastal Commissi certify its Agua Hedioncla Sepcific Plan as meeting the lad use plan re& rnents of the Coastal Act,. This is the first such revest to have been rec
by the Conmrission. The City prepared its Agua Hediondla Plan in part as or
the pilot projects undertaken with the predecessor Coastal Commission in Y
and continued by the present Commission last year.
The Agua Hedionda Plan covers a segment of the City of Carlsbad - the are;
surrounding the Agua Heclionda Lagoon. The plan deals with the lagoon its
with possible recreat5orial use of the shoreline, with conversion of forme1
agricultural land to ~crlian development, and with a number of other issues exist in other Local Coastal Programs. Thus, the.CodssLon's decision 01 Agua Hedionda Plan will, to some extent at least, be seen as guidance to t local govemments in dealing with comparable situations in their own coas
areas.
Under the procedures established by the Coastal Act and the Commissionrs eons, the Agua Hedionda land use plan was first reviewed by the San Eeg
Regional Commis&on, aich approved the plan subject to several conditio (See Attachment A) ssion's first responsibility is to determine whether the plan, as conditi approved by the Regiolial Conmission, meets the policy requirements of Cha 3 of the Act, or whether there is "a substantial issue as to confozmity Y
the policies." As stated above, the staff believes that there are subst:
issues warrating reuiew by the State Codssion.
Under the provisions of the Act and the-Commission*s regulations, the Con
has 60 days in which to1 review the plan; the 60 days began on.the'date-tf.
was received from the Regional Commission, January 101, 1978. However, Df. has waived the 60 day limit by four days so that a final Codssion actic be taken at the March I&-15 Con;nd.ssion meeting, If the Commission deterr that the land use plan does & raise a substantial. issue, then under Ser
30512(c) of the Act, the land use plan shall be deemed "cerLLfied" by tb Commission. If, on the other hand, the Coession determines that there
substantial question a:; to conformity of some portions of the plan with .
policies in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, then the Commission is to revi
act on those pozctions.
As provided by Section 30512 of the Coastal Act, the
11, SIG?JIFICANcE OF AFPRCIILI, GF' WID USE PUN -
Approval of the land use plan phase of a kcal Coastal Pmgram has major cauons under the Coastal Act. First, approval of the land use plan me2
all the egnificant land use decisions have been made in a manner "suffi detailed to indicate the kinds, location and intensitx of land usesfr tha
consistent .dth the Coastal Act policies (emphasis added) and that all '' applicable resource protection and development polS.cies" recplired by the
Act for the area in apestion have been precisely stated (Section 30108.5 Second, approval of the land use plan rnezns that sufficieat direction hE provided for the local government to proceed to the zoning phase without
need for any further resolution of planning issues- When the local gow
submits its proposed zoning revisions to the ComnrisSion for review, the
aP Codssion review is different from that at the land use phase becau:
.
-&
e. -0 . votlng reqyirements undeir the Coastal Act necessitate a majority vote of Cornmission to deny or recommend a modification of the zoning ordinance.
Once the land use plan and zoning ordinance(s) and maps have been certifj
the authority for issuing coastal development permits will be transfern
the local government. A:U proposals for development within the certifiec will then be submitted to the local government rather than to the coasta: ssions, and the role of the co;nnrission will be that of reviewing any appc
of local government actions filed under the limited appeals provisions oJ
Seceon 30603 of the Act,, The Local Coastal Program as certified must tl
be capable of carrying out the requirements of the Coastal Act. Of cour:
any subsequent changes in the Local Coastal Program must be submitted as
amendments for Commission review.
SUMMARY OF 'LAND USE PLAN
The Agua Hedionda Specific Plan, as submitted by the City, would:
0
.- 111,
- Protect the more significant wetland ad land habitats of the Agua
Hedionda Lagoon and its upland areas.
- Call for shoreline access to be provided as part of new development
along the north shore; for dedication of a small overlook park on tl
Pannonia property 011 the north shore of the inner lagoon; .ad for
creation of an actZve Community Park on the south shore of the lagac
on land leased frctm SDG&F;,
- Allow for development of the Pamania property north of the lagaon, which was used to gmw tomatoes until 1973; and allow for conversior
existing agricultural lads to provide recreational apas in the Cor; ity Park and to accommodate commercial recreation developenti Etast (
and adjacent to th.e Interstate 5 freeway.
- Provide for residen-lLal development in all but two areas along the
entire undeveloped north shore, with a range of densities and a desj
review process for new development. - Not propose any new additional commercial/recreation development on north shore.
- mow substantial increases in the dsnsity of development over that
Under the zoning which preceded the specific plan (-bit B), the SDG&E
shore parcel is zoned for public utility uses rather than for the medium,
density residential uses of 10 to 20 units/acre permitted by the plan: ti
property is mned for approximately 5 units/acre, rather than the 10 to 2
units mposed in the plan; ad the land around Hedionda Point is zoned i
. units P acre instead of the 4 to 10 units the plan proposes. In additicn,
Kelly property is zoned. for appremately 5 units/acre, whereas the Specj Plan designates it for IO to 20 units/acre. hile the Specific Plan now
nates the entire Pannonia property for up to 4 units per acre, the 1973 :
calls for approximately 13 units per acre on one portion and apprdrnatelj
units per acre on the remainder.
in the present zoning, which was originally applied in 1973.
-7-
0. 0.
IV. MpLjGR PmmT IXCISICNS IN L TKE AQJA HEDICTIDA fACaT m:
I. Sea View Cc~160T;Tini~ms - This permit grated by the State Conmission on October 4, 1974, was.r"or a two-story, 27-~nit, condominium project on t
corner of Carlsbzd Ballevard ad Tamarack Avenue. The sipLficat is% in this permit dealt idth project height, bulk and den~ty md T&-i;h prq
~ng a pubric accessmy along the north shore of the Agua HedLonda hgl Approval af this pezmit application by the State Conmission was condit:
upon the dedicaticr, ti3 the City of Carlsbzd of ai open space ad public
access easement amro.~mately 60 by lcx) feet along Tmzrack Avenue as a link in a futa-e pblic-use area and trzil systen that would eventufl; connect the lagoon ad the public beach.
Pspaa2yo -4~~esl 110. 8-73 - In October of 1973, he State Commission 2p
the constmctior, of the first phase of this 23 Unit corrdorrrinhi projec
key issue involved th ccnversion of a,crieiturzl lands to urban devel especia11f the precedent such conversion might set for other sidlzr p
cels in the area. Of partLicular importmce were the cmdiAti.ons 02 ap?
designed to compensate for the loss of open space ale% the lagoon,. T
Codssion required that the first phase be constructed subject to a s tLal. setback from the edge of the lagoon behind an ex5stb-g sewer ease
It also requirzd thst a 3.2-acre mea immediately adjacent to and mz
along the entire 1eiigtf.r of the property fmnl'dr-g &&e lag003 be dedicai the City of Carlsbzd. A5 in the case of the Sead-ew Condoniriums proJ
th5 CorniisS-;.on intended that the area along the 12gCGn shore ccdd eve link up xith a contjnums public accessway to rn from the Stake Beact west alozlg the entire north shore of the Agaa Hedionda Lagocn. It shc
be noted that the decicztion reqired by the State Ccdssion could be Bsted in con-ti-,grati,on ad enlarged as a cor,fiAlion of appovd for SI phases of the Pzipagayo project. A fbal note concern-s that por'kon o:
property which remains betxeen 3.2 acre dedicaeon ad thc sewe-xne mat,. The State Coinrrrission permit stipulates that &?e appE-cvlt shal only those develocmerit rights on that portion for USES that are ccr,si
with the- Coastdl PI.UI (Act).
Pmorria Inv=,stment~:orcorzkdm (Pacesztter Homes) Aixeal No. 17EE-73 -
project was aenisd by the Sr;ate Conmission GR Cecefnber l9? 1973. Thi
action wzs subsequently upheld in c&- 'Be proposd was to subdiVi
acres on a mesa overloo'xing Agua Heciionda hgoon into 165 lots for th struction of single-fari-ly reddences. Concerns of the Con~!LsSiOn Ee
Lagoon, the impacts or' urbm moff and erosion from 'the Pmoda sit
the lagccn, the conversion of -what were then prime a,g5cultLwal lands
and the forecloYcisse of plvlning options for the Pa-aonia site md Xgc Hediccda Ligoon =ea pemiing the develotpent of the Coastd. Plm. Tk Commission also considered alternative uses for the site, such as it::
recreational potential.
Encina Ur3.t 5 ADD^^ No. "EL75 - The Comnisdon agproved Lhis pe-rnit November IS, 1975. Approval o+' this pernit to the Sa Eego Gas wAd
Company includxi several ccnc5ticns pertainizg ot air-quality monito:
edssion controls, zcnitor',r-g of kelp resmces & rq1acernm-t of (
kelp beCs, scree,sing of the power plant from 1-5 -ai<? lw!dsca@.ng ax and the prc-rision of pbEc beach access. SpecificeJ, tne conc5tii
ting to beach access req3.red "the State Departner-t of Parks and Recr
-&
2.
3.
4.
' ' accept a public recreational 0 easement coverhg'that 9 rtion of the San Die
Gas and Electric Company property lying between Carlsbad Boulevard and the
Pacific Ocean and between the power plant's discharge channel and the Terr
subdivision. This dedication was to commence on June 1, 199, when an ex%
ing lease to the SDX6 Cornpany Employees Association expires.
V. STAFF' ANALYSIS: SUBSTANTIjG - ISSUES AND PREZD'lIflARY RECO&PfEHDA?TONS
As noted above, the review of the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan by the San D
Regional Cormfission was careful and thorough. Several aspects of that pla
approved by the Regional Conmission subject to conditions, are likely to b
by other local governments along the coast as establishing overall Coinmiss policy, and the staff therefore believes that these interpretations are of
substantial importance as to warrant State Commission reviex.
For ease in Commission processing, the staff has organized the discussion
follows to include an analysis of what the Agua Hedionda Plan proposed, hc proposals have been modified by Regional Commission conditions, and, where
propriate, a preliminary staff recommendation for further changes. The. st
proposes to make final recommendations, on the basis of discussion at the hearing and the direction ofthe Commission, at the CodssionVs meet% (
l4-15, whtch is tentatively scheduled to be held in San Diego.
A. _Cormnercial-Recreation~ Use of Shoreline.
The Coastal Act gives high prioeky to commercial-recreational developmen
and places particular emplnasis on reserxh.4 oceanfront land or areas suit for water-oriented recreation for such use (see Sections 30213, 30220, 30
30222, 30224 and 30255 of the Coastal Act). Of all the coastal lagoons o San Diego County, Agua Hedionda Lagoon is the most suitsble for extensive
access and recreatioral--commercial development. Buena Vista Lagoon to tk
is a wildlife preserve and at best is suited for passive recreation. To is BatiquLtos Lagoon which, unlike Agua Hedionda Lagoon, has a basically
waterfront area; .with its shallow depth and distinctive natural features, Lagoon is best suited for public recreationaluse kJith any overnight fact or hter,sive day use facilities set back sigtzificantly from the shoreline
In contrast, Agua Hedionda Eagoon has a large water area and relatively i
depth, making it the most, suitable sheltered water area in the north cow
for shoreline and w-zter-oriented recreation including fishing, clammhg,
sail and power boating, sWg, and water skiing. Given the extensive
line areas already committed to residential and public recreational use north county area from Solana Beach to Carlsbad, only the Oceanside area
provides sieficant commercial recreational opportunities in the waterf areas of San Diego comity and the only sheltered water area in the Carls
Oceanside area is Oceanside Harbor. For Agua Hedion'da Lagoon itself, th of Carlsbad has excluded commercial uses from the outer and middle lagoc
the only area remaw with the potential for commercial-recreational d ment is the inner lagoon.
The Agua Hedionda Plan submitted by the City of Carlsbad designates two
commercial-recreational use: Snug Harboy, a IC-acre site, presently,usf boat launching facility; and Whitey's Landing, a 2.l.4-acre site, now the of a smdlz restaurant, In approvtng the plan, the Regional Commission 1
.
.
-9-
@ 0.
.I that the area in Ishug Harbor bekdeen the eucal.Jptus ve and the exten:
Hoover StreFr;t be redesignated to commercial-recreation, to increase the
available for this high-priority use.
Even with the condi-tion es%ablishect by the F!@onal Corrnission, hoxever
rnajoriky of the corth shore of the middle and inner lagoon is desigmtec sidential dwelopment o Under the Coastal Act policies, residential dew of oceanfront Imd suitable for recreational. use 9s allowed only if thf and foreseeable demand for public or comescial recreationd EtckivLties
adequately pmvided for ja the aee. The -%gio~al Com5.sslon fiadi-ngs I
demonstrate that the foreseeable ~"uture ciemand for recreation cdd be c on other pmperties in the CarI-sSai area. Indeed, the e-qected populat,: - in the north county ard forecasts of Licreashg rium5ers or" vis2tors i? 1
County indicates that recreational. demand is likely to increase.
There are several other reasom to consider hcrsaskd corzercial recrea'
abng the b-er shore. first, there is stmcg e~dence of historic pub'
inlading an eat2nsive trair SYS~EM which s7zzgests that the public may : established prescrLptLve lights on many of the imer lagoon p2rcel.s. S
topographic mags and histar4-c surrey maps indicate that much of the Fer L & R properties west of' &.6.stol Covs may have been subject to ticlzl 2c and therefore my be subject to the pbzc trust. of Whitey's Landing lesres the lagoon with only one publ3.c LaundnLng fa
suggestkg that there is (3 need to reserve areas for additional or re& boat lamching faci'lities.
The Spec-Cic Plan also desip-ztes the Papagayo property OZI the shore of fagoon for residential devs1opmen-t 7~~i7ich as noted abme, is a lower 915 for shore fmEt lmd. Hcwevx, res5dkrntt;ial developxxs 02 the Papagayo
should, 5.n the stafz's opinion, be accoqenkd by a&i.%iom-l FUKEC par
to offset the loss of public recreational opporhnikies acd to parLia
the recreational dsnmch of adfition& locd residents.
F-reliclizary Staff Eiecomim~zxlation
Mor to mbxit5ng iqlementation ordLnmces, the Ci%y of Carlshad sho mit a re-vised draft of the J+a. IIedionda Specif'Ls Plan that:
1) Ether deslaates the Ee~onda Point I%operty, the Ferrem (RA and the L & R propeYUy for cor;;mercial--recre3tior,zl use 2 desi some or all. of these pmperties for resiaentlql use only on th
of an analysis sha~L~~g that other lan(5s aTe available to neet :
and foreseeable nee& for :~ater-ofimbed, ccmi?lercial-rec=at5-o
veloprnent in the Caylsbad area.
2) bvides that ciesigmtion of the PEpsgayo pmperty for residen than commeru.al_-r-creational use 5s condtioned u?on dedLcatio
adequate recrzational areas as descx5bed irl more detail below secticn &&ng ~+Tth the Papagap parcel.
Pkaily, the recat
-10-
0- 0
B. Agricultural Land CoiEersion
The City's land use plan proposes that the 59-acre Pannonia property, on a overlooking the north shore of the inner lwoon, be designated for residen
use- The property is physically capable of supporting agriculture and was
agricultural use for cro.ps such as tomatoes until 1974,
The issues with regard to the Pamonia property exist in many places along
coast, and thus the Comrrrission's decision with regard to this property is
to have considerable precedential effect.
Because the Pannonia property has been held aut of agricultural production
.three of the last five years, and because it has Class I11 soils, it is te
classified as nokprime agricultural land. The Coastal Act establishes st
by which all proposals to convert agricultural land to other uses are to b
uated. The standards for converting nokprime land are in Section 3Om a as follows:
.
"All other (i.e., non-.prirne) lands suitable for agricultural use shall
be converted to non-agrzicultural uses unless:
1)
2)
Continued or renewed agricultural. use is not feasible, or
such conversion would preserve prS_me agricultural land or
concentrate development consistent dth Section 30250, . . e 1
The City contends that renewed agricultural production on the Pannonia p
wuuld be infeasible. The Regional CommLssipn did Xot ;?gr.ee or d,isa~ee *
cmtefison, but rather approved the CO~verSlon On t e baas of: tne i&eonp --- -. ___~__- _- ------- concentration of development.
The (Sty hzs acknowledged that parcels of Pannonia size, soil, and locatic:
viable agxicultural units but the City argues that taxation costs urd van(
problems reduce the viahLlity of the pzrcel. The CityTs contention does I
Significant issue of policy interpretation because taxation can be contro:
thrush appropriate zoni.n,g and the EIJiamson Act, and because vandalism 1 appear to be less of a problem than in other areas in that the Pa-monia 1
is on a mesa r&th only onle side exposed to urbzn development.
If the CommLssion finds that renewed agricultural use of -the property is
feasible, then, under the Coastal Act, conversion to residential or other ment can be permitted, If, however, the Commission finds that renewed ag
use 2 feasible, conversion can be allowed only if the conversion would p
prime a,gicultural land or would concentrate development as provided by S
30250 of the Act.
The Regional Commission concluded that conversfon would be consistent ~t 30250. The staff believes this matter poses a substanCdl issue, because
possible effects of such a deterxination on sirrd.lar areas in other coasta
.
-11-
, e. -0 .
Due to prior local goverrrm-nt approvals of le2pfrog residential md othc development in agricultural areas, many a@cultu-ral lands in the Sa Di
region are trithin or close to urban developxmk. In the -ea between Ai
Hedionda lzgoon ad Eatiquitos Lagoon, City appro-imls have resulted in t
construction of car dealerships and several residential develocnents (e. Uta &Era, SpinnAer, Covington, Ayres) ad the &ension of a najor se:
line (Ayres perriit approved by the Regions Conessi.on]e Similarly, the
Ea Juana Valley area alscl has urSa developnerYc. in close pr0;Ci;;Oty aid,
two recent perzits, xgments were presented. &cat the cmversion of ag;!
tural lvlds md mbul iidi.l3ing (PIGS, Aspezl IJo. 284 -77, and 14zdonn.a 2.85
Agricultural conversion and concentrat;ion of development was .m is-we ir
caciia and Eoci-xitas areas as well (Pkymor, P-9peal No. 55-77). The corn of nmpene lmds to prormte concentratZon of developmen5 pull also be
in the Orage County Loc.a:L Coastal Program for the Irvine Coast.
Pre li. min LIT St st f f Re c ommsndaf5 I on
The stzff believes a finc5in.g that cunversion of Pm-onia would lezd to ( tration of development czn be justified under the Coastd Act ody if t!
of Garlsbad is forndy ccdted to preseming lad south 02 the lagoon
agxicultural use. Consequently in order to m&e the necessary r"in&ng,
believes the City should pro-dde assurancs that the a,e&k-ad lzr~&j 5
the lagoon will indeed be kept in thzt USE? 271d that the cLty 1~32. tdxe 1
steps toward kee$ng this: Lad in a,gicultvre. ?"nus, the stdf believe: more is neezed thm. siql-y tightaing the plxn's conversicn cr"-tel='ia, 2: proposed by the Region& CoiinissLcn, Without nor:! sg.leci.2~ action such on the avaiUlity of utility hooku~s, ad the use of exclusiw zgz5c-i
zorriz xith ccnseqent reduction of tm pressures,. there d.lL Ss geak for properb2- cxners to begin leaving aeir Lads i?a17oi1 for Lkee cut Oj
years .so thzi;, uncier the statutory defhiAti.or-, ther land -muid no long classifixi as pine aqiculturd and tle less str5ngen.t ccnwzsion poli(
Act wdd be aI;plicable. TherF: ;?odd thm be the s2'1;e ,?.e& przszure a
mats for cmxersion cn that lad as is now %he czse on Pmc&a. &prc
the conversion of the Pmnonia uarcel xithmt conu-i;ions. ass\zr;-n,c concer of deuelopaezt :?auld c:snslZtute a precedent for sin&kr ccnversions el% in Carlsbzd z7d the state.
Prior to su'cnritting new odinances, the City of Czrlsbad shdd subait : to the hd use plan aff'ectirg the I?m-o~xia progerky shc:sing thzt: *.
1) Renewxi agricultural use of the property is in fact infeasible, ta.?,q into acccmt the possibility of :?ilXamson Act nea,wes, tax assessroents raflecking a City d&emin&ion to keep the prq in ~~!~5cultur~&. use, and measures to nrinihixize vulddism or 0th:
problems arising from the Id's pxw511Lty to residenAAd. areas
that
2) Conversion is pehssible under the Act because the City is for:
ccmitted to preserving land south of the IGoon for a,.;r;,culturre
and thus conversion of the PumorLa property *&U help concentr urbm development. Such Cit-j cozmitmect cm2.d be stated in a vl cf xclys, including zor2i-ng, lon9tex-m E,?rits on the ~v&hbility utility hookqs that would increase pressuxs for ccnver~cris, (
- 12-
2, e. 0
possible incentives for landowners to keep their lands in agricult
production. The staff believes that without such clear measures, will be incentives for the Owners of prime agricultural lands in t to let their lands; lie fallow for three out of five years, thus te
qyaliffing the lands for nokprime designation, and thus alloeng of potentially-significant agricultural areas.
As an alternative to the above, the conversion of Pannonia could t on the approval of an agricultural protection progran as part of t
the area between Agua Kedionda and Batiquitos lagoons.
-13-
0 C, -Use & Restoration Wiliilife Ar~as
The Agua He2ionda Specific Plan proposes a lwacr:: XiIdlife Preserve to pro%
what the Citj regards as the most sigificant wetlad areas on the eastern ed of the lagoon. The Plan provides that no use shall occur for three years wit
the proposed reservet s bomd~des i.rhile methods of acq.5. sition are explord.
However, in the event that acq5si"Lon of the reseme is not successful, the Specific Plan pmxides that the land use linritaticns cf the underlying zone,
incluchg the floodplzh overlay zone and qpliczble Specific Plm polices,
shall apply. The plan does not have my provisiozs or policies relaerg to t
restoration of degraded habitat 2.m~~ within the lqoon are&
!be Regional. Ccrmlssion attached several cond5tions to its approval of the Ag
Hedionck Plul to ensure that the plan incorporates the Act's resource protect
policies (see Conditions 11,14, 15t 17, and 23 in Attechent A). The conditi
require provision of buffer zones on adjacent properties, expansion of the Wi Preserve to include 611 of the propcsed Department of Fish ad Gme accptsiti
the relocation of Kelly Road extension out of the preservs aree, the establis of boundaries ~cunci the sensitive resource areas t.o yrotect them durb-g a~y n
tenance dredging of the lagoon, and. possible restriction of mot;? kcat traifj it is found that the eelgrass beds in the western cove 02 t5e baer lagoon az
adversely affected.
kt the proposed -Preserve area, the wordir,o of the Re,rional Conmission conctit!
did not CqJEcitly chvlge the underly-bs mediui+dms:ty residentid use desi:
of the Speciific Plan. If the property is not acquFred bytke public, rnediuii- density residentid use appears to be dllowed by tne Plan - a si,&ficant in(
in intensity of use ovzr the ccrrent ag~iculttL-21 zonLcg. Such resi.denti.7 1
does not agear to be comistent Tdth the policies or" the Cozstal Act, ires: of the question or" ac@sition. The prcperties prcscsed for irlcksion wLthk
wildlife preseme =e 2.n the floodplak of Agxi '-:e&-sr,ca Creek, cantah a vi
+ archaeological resource, have hi&value hajitat zreas, ad. are adjacezt tJo I
rcore v&ua'ole arid ssnsitLve habitat azeas. A nw'r;er of Coastal Act pollcles
require lixik-3-g the type and i?tensLky of use cn scch lads.
Mhile the cou.~.-&s hzve held that the types of uses alluded for ueas with si@
w5ldlife -dues may be severly linited, the City cmld consider uses such 2s
night tent cznpLag (see Adamsor-, A?peal No. 163-73) that would not reqxire s
si%e disturbaxe ad a small-sczle comnercizl use 011 the knoll adjacent to P
Drive.
With respect to Kelly Road, tke Specific Plan proposed 30 extend this road a
collector from its cmpnt tennixus at the edge of the proposed wildlife pre to eventuay comect to 32 C2mim Rsal. The pro?osed roai location wculd 1
been 21. the expulaed l?ildlife Preserve habitat ,=rea, ana was objected to by
Departrner-t of Fish and Gane. The Regional Ccmission required that the rcct
relocated h cocceration -.th the Departinent of Fish md Same, without speci
my relocated route, in ax effort to resolve ths pctentid problem of corst a road iin the preserve arez~.
'here is scme question whether the road c2n be safely relocated oc;t.,side of i
serve area. Currenti;T the rcad te-mkntes ,jc.st to the northest of a small.
Ccntkdfnq the road will require either sk:
the hill, out &to the r'locdplain ad XilcGiTz Preserve, or cuttkg the roac the hill.
xould pose serioas conflicts -with Coastal Act policies because of the EXC~G
onto the flood$Lain ad preseme. Cuttins the rmd into the hill is &;.sic
.and adjacent to the flcodplain.
Locaticn of the mad in the floodplain, -&th a gradual ;FT~ safa
- 14-
s possible, but may crea @ such a tight curve as to be u&e. Cutting enough
the hill to provide a safe curve may endanger existing development of the to1 of the hill, and would tend to conflict with Coastal Act policies calling for
preservation of natural landforms. Further, it is not clear that the road i:
sential for access, given the limitations on development in the Wildlife Pre:
established in the Regional Commission conditions and the potential bicycle i
pedestrian access proposed under the access conditions.
A final concern with respect to uses affecting resource areas is that of pott
adverse impacts from boating on eelgrass protection if the western cove of tk inr?er lagoon. The Regional Commission Condition 15 recpires that special me:
be taken to protect the eelgrass beds should it be demonstrated that greater
protection is necessary. However, the condition did not specify a protision periodic examination of the beds or a means of determining if the habitat is adversely affected.
.
Prelh5nax-y Staff Recommendations:
Prior to the submittal of the implementation ordinances, the City should pre
the Commission revisions of the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan which:
1) Delete the medium-density residential designation for the expanded
Wildlife Preserve and redesignates the property to a use or uses co
sistent with n;aintenance of the resource values of the property,
Delete the proposed extension of Kelly Drive. Department of Fish and Gme determine a route for the road which wo not encroach into either the flooclplain or the Wildlife Preserve, a
which would not rewire excessive grading in conflict wLth Coaskzl
policies, the Commission would reconsider the extension of Kelly Dr
Include a precise delineation of wetland habitat areas capable of
restoration, along with the appropriate policies to assure their re
storation in accordance with Section 30231 of the Coast& Act. Whc
City finds that restoration of a degraded wetland area is infeasibl
should justify such a conslusion at the time it submits the re;<sec of the Specific Plan.
Include provision for the periodc checkhg of the eel grass beds t
ensure their protection. The Plan should propose that the finding: from such periodic examinations are to be provided to the Departmer
Fish and Game for determination as to whether special protective m~ need to be taken to protect the habitat area. If Fish and Game det
'boating use should be limited, the Plm should provide that the Cit
comply with the measures
2) Should the City and
3)
4)
recommended by Fish and Game:
-1%
IT. C-racEnz Control d F1ooddG-n Protection 0
The proteceon of the Agua H.edionda Lagcon wetlands is obviously one of the
important coast& objectives, and invol-Jes not only land use issues (as dis
above) but also protection zigainst adverse impacts of other activities. PA activities that Cm have substantial impacts on sedhentation of the, wetkp
are grading ad floodplain filling. The ~munt of sedimmt atid silt ccntai in mOff is related to the itmoUnt of ga*ng tang place and the rimer j
the grading is coxducted. Consequently, paiing practices xitiin the &dr basins of coastal wetlands have been of great, concern to tk Cop~ssicn, a:
cated by the recent cisid of a pendt for a SubcLivision xithin the d-aina:
San Die,<to Lagoon (Appeal No. 1@-77). Tke Regionzl CO,~S<OA, in Con$ called for more specific criteria to be included dm5ng the irplement&i.on
regarding the treatment of moff waters, requirements for grzciing, and me
to prevent sediment from entering the lagoon. However, s'czll' believes the
to the irr@eaenta'ki.on phase.
Another concern is fiUng of the flaodplain, as tbLs tends to increase tl velocities of flood flows, thereby increasL.ng ths axnmt of se&nent that
reaches the lqoon (rather thm being deposited on the flocd fz5nge furth5
upland). The Specific Plan contzlns a po7icy that probibits alteration OJ ". . .waterways th-izt trdd case SigcLficzt adverse iiqactso . .". Umkr thj policy and the City's floodplzin zoning, hcwever, development would be al in the f1oodpM.n 8s long 2s it Coes not encroach upn the lrtiaterr.r~y'r of
Agua Hedionda Crsek.
PreLinina-y Str;"f Reco,mer,da+Aor-s:
Prior to the su'ccrittd. or" tlie implerr,extaL5.cn ordinulces, "&e Etjj skuld to the Codseccn rs5sions of the Agua HecEon6a Speefic Plw thzt:
measures sh0d-d be included in the land use stage rather tha being &fC=
1) Include nore specif2c policies to control rrmor'f ad emdon pw-
suarlt to Section 3O23L of %he Coastal Act. Cne stadd thak shc
be incoForated is tkat all new devd-apment be deegned ad. COZIS
ted to prevmt any increase in peak -off fmm z 2C)-yea, one4 rainstorm. In adcE+tion the plw shauld rsc$re that all Rew dev merat, pro~os&s involving paling present a moff controi PI= 't~
denor,strates that ceak rmor'f shdl not increase from the sit2 d a 20-year, on+hour storm. The plzn shcx3 dso de&nate a cm
ti0-n season &zing :h.ich LE. grading, filling,- cr cleazzng of v:
tian shall be Emited, and should prcg?.ose standzr6s for rcpbnu
finished ad unfinished slopes. (Erosion 2;ld sedirneatacon 56: currently being pregzl-ed by ths Sa =ego Regio~d CC~SS~OR EE prnri.de further guidance to the City in prepa5ng this materid.
the plm-. )
Contain policiss that prevent u?y ,tilEng or 6eveLopent in the
year flood pl~n of Aga Hedionda Creek, until such tLma as the of Carlsbad has a cer+Afi& flocc? ccntrol program mder the Nat Flood Inmmce Prcgran. Such a Emita"2on of flCG6@2iII &vel -is nec2ss-J to mir3,nize YLsk to lifp 3-d propercly frcm flOCd !-
(pursuat to Coststal Act Secticn ?0253), ad to protsct the %et from adverse irnpxts of moff (yrsuar,t to SectLen 30231) ad Ernit stream dt,c!raticns (wsnant to Section 30236) in orckr 1
dze incrDased flood velocities ad seciiamt de?rod+don.
*
2)
-16-
4 E: De,qree of Smecift Required
The staff and the representatives of the City of Carlsbad have, since the ' ning of the pilot program work, sought to arrive at agreement as to the de
specificity required in a local plm to meet the standards of the Coastal
There is not yet complete agreement. The City's position is that the plan modified by the Regional Commission, meets Coastal Act requirements as to
city. The staff believes, for the reasons explained below, that additiona is required under the Coastal Act.
UnXke the traditional planning and zoning work of local governments, the
Act places emphasis on making major land uses decisions in the preparation
land use plan rather than in the zoning that follows. The Coastal Act doe contemplate that the zoning \Jill be of lesser importance, but rather that
be essentially the drafting of measures to carry out the already-agreeGuy decisions made in approval of the land use plan.
The City stdf, and the San Diego Regional Commission and its staff, have
diligently to try to resolve disagreements and to insure that, where there tIian one possible interpretation of a Coastal Act policy as applied to a s
land or water area, theinterpretationmost nearly in accord with the inter Coastal Act is followed.
have reached the Commission, the staff belfieves it im2ortant that the Stat Cornmission provide guidance in some of these interpretations.
Of significance is the fact that the Coastal Act contains precise standarc
shore'ie area, in particular, for matters such as use (Section 30221), a( (Sections 30211 znd 30212) and view protection (Section 30251).
This section of the staff analysis addresses the question of determining :
appropriate standard or" specificity in a land use plvl in the area of'pub:
View protection and design standards. First the substantid issues raised access provisions of the Agua Hedionda plan and several preliminary staff dations dealing with overall access conditions are presented. Second, vir tection and design issues rdsed by the lad use plm are discussed. Fin: section of the reportpresents a parcel by parcel analysis containing specj
cess and design recommendations where the overall access urd design condit
either re@re further elaboration or should be modified to meet the rea$ of tfie Coastal Act.
~
Nonetheless, because this is the first land use
lo Overzll PUblLc Access Conditions
The Agua Hedionda Specific Plan submitted by the City of Carlsbad contain:
cies calling for additional vertical and lateral accessways along the nor of the lagoon and includes both a Bike Rolrte Plan and a Pedestrian Access
(See exhibits C and D) . The Plvl calls foP the development of a shared b pedestrian route of a minimum of 10 feet in width generally within a 15 tc
easement along the north shore. The route as proposed by the City would 1 discontinouswhere the embankments for the railroad tracks and the Inters1
5-freeway occur. The City's plan proposes that additional vertical and 1:
accessways be provided by using existing utility easements and leasehold j
held by the City, or that such accessways be acqyired either through age(
with the property owners or as condtions of approval for development. On smth shore, tie plan proposes that, because of the steep bluffs which e.k
adjacent to the lagoon, public access be linrited to points within the pro]
codty park.
- 17-
No accesstray is prop @ ed through the area designate A OF! the easterly end
the lagoon as a i.I-ilcUi.fe preserve in order to protect it from hwnan intrusi
In approving the .4guz Hedionda Specific Plul, the San Diego Coast Regional
fssion attached several con6tLons intended to achieve greater consistwcy
the access provisions of the Coastd Act. Ccndi+don No. 2 recpircs that cc public access be provided if feasible across the railroad tracks and Inter: 5, and re&res a vert;ical access cciiection with a proposed overlook park PPlnonia pruperty. The c0ndi"ton also calls for the precise plottirg of tl -psed public access easercent from the edge of the lagoon, ma suggests a m; mum builcbg setSack line of 50 feet fmm the edge of the access easement q
the inner lagocn. TsThere the accesswq would be seprzted from any develop
by bluffs, hoxever, a 25 foot setbzck was suggested as adecgate. The Regi
Co.mission access standuds are merely suggested crtteria that would have
be fkdized at the time the implenentation phase is approved.
PreE16na-y Staff Reco;nrexxlations
a. Land Use P7,m Resuirements - Beca-ise of t'ne reqxirenents of Seci5on
30211, 30212 m*d 30500 of the Coastzl Ac3, staff recommends that t3e hd ' plpl contain specific xcess recpirenerks including, where possible a mapy of public use area.
b. Adeauacy or Prmosed. Lm-d Use JESS - Becase the accessmy prwoz in the plan is intznaed to acccmocate both bicycles ad pec?estdans, m-& because the proposed path trill link the heavily used Bicentenid bike rcut on old Highway I ad t'ne bicycle route on El Cdno Zeal ard tu11 serve tf: roUcre&ti.cnd, needs of increasing voluqe in Worthern Sa Giego Cotlrrtg, BS h
as potat2zCL comercid .ad recreaticnd. uses pmpased along the norLh shc
the Codssfon stdf, seprated bicycle ad peaestsan .paths qpee to be
necessary to asusu.re dm3 urd safe p2d.L~ use or" the accessxq. Further
the separa"j.on of the t.xo paths t5XL 2rcwid.e greater 2l~;d't;ility in their to dllotr for tGpo,g'&??C cor,ctitions dmg-portions of thz north &ore, (m one pzth dgbt ran along the shorelize in meas where there is li.z6ted 137
ground, the other might rm along high ground tddng advatzge of ths excq
views of tbs bgoan.7
'Sherefore, pear to, or cotexitinuts wLth the submittal 02 the implements ordinagces, the City of Carls5ad shmU s5x5.t revised &&ft of the A=- 1 lad use ph La the Cc-dssicn for revie?? and EIJPL'OV~, w'hich incoqor& follo-xkg stmc?&s: The badc standard shcu2.d be the 50 foot access are
25 foot setbzck for cont;igwus structures recomended-by Lle Region& Cox Separate bicycle arid pedestr;iE;n 9aths should be provided xit?xh a -marnun: cztzion of fifty feet adwad of M~EUI high tide Sne, except as pmyeCed
the parcel by parcel analys5.s set forth below. The bicycle pz5n shculd b
minimum of 10 feet wide, while the pedestr;-ul path shdd be a ixhinun of -&de, The reTJ3.sed land use plan skdd include sn access component Wi.icf!
further refinement of the accesswzy ad setSacks; for ny =ea where -&e5 cannot be net, the City mq subinit a unolchent si30Nh.g that eevdtnt F
mas have been provicted. The access;crajr corqcnent should ixlde a preci
tion of the proposed easemat, as xeG as stadads for lmdsca@cg of bc dediczted czea ad sstbacks. It should also inc7bde stula3r55 for the p.r pubEc a,ezi.'jes along the sccssswsy thzt Lnchlde but ce not lirrtted to
fumiturB mch 2s beeches, &%ikng fount~ns, sicycle racks, ana lighti:
-1€L
c. -Implement a on of access Droposals. The .- @ a Hedionda Plan does
'>
' tain &y detailed proposals indicating how the northshore accessway is to
mented. It is difficslt to find that the plan provides for ''maximum pub23
unless it includes a mechanism to assure the dedication and improvement of
accessway.
Therefore, prior to the submittal of the 'implementation ordinances, the Ci
Carlsbad should submit an amended version of the Specific Plan which propc
mechanism to assure early completion of the accessway. Possible alternati
be the use of lrin lieu'' park funds from develo-ment in the plan area to fi access improvements in a systematic manner or a phasing progrvn that condi
each stage of north shore developnent on the completion of usable linked E of the accessway either by the City or by a cooperative effort of the adjc
property owners .
de Continuous access- Regional Condition No.2pmposes a feasibili continuous accesswayonthe shore, but does not specify feasibility criteri
ditionally, while the Specific Plan proposal to limit access to the east' F
the Lagoon in the vicinity of the Wildlife Preserve is consistent with prc
the sensitive natural habitat, it may be possible to develop a restricted
bicycle/pedestrim bridge which would protect the habitat while at the siln
providing public access around the Lagoon's eastern shore. Such a walkwa3
provide access to the proposed comrmUrity pwk and also &Low the public ar
t&ty to view and enjoy the wetland habitat area.
Therefore, prior to the sut-mital of implementation ordinulces, the City of
bad should conduct a~ analysis of the technical and economic feasibility c Viding a rfcontinuous7* accessway along the north shore. The City of Carls'r
should also request the Department of Fish and Game to revieti the envirom
feasibility of a wooden pedestria/bicycle bridge between the north shore
proposed community park .compatible with the Wildlife Preserve area. These
should be presented to the Commission Tor a determination of whether or nc
"continuous" accessway requirement should be amended into the Specific P1
2, View Protection and Shoreline Desiim Stvldards
The Specific Plan includes a section on design criteria which sets out gui for new development with respect to building buUc, shape, and exterior app The criteria include a 3Sfoot height limitation except'as provided for ir
proposed design review ordinance, as well as parking standards, The guide also propose that lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlyint
wiXl. prevail except as provided in the proposed design review ordinance.
The Regional Commission required the deletion of the design criteria sec
the Land Use Plan phase on the basis that such guidelines should be revise
submitted along with the ordinance/implementation phase of -the LCP. Instc the design criteria proposed in the Plan, the Regiondl Commission proposed
goals for individual parcels. It also suggested an example of specific de standards to guide the City during preparation of the implementation ordin
including sample height limitations and Wding setbacks. The problem wi approach is that it appears to leave the establishment of design criteria zoning phase without clear policy guidwxe as part of 'the certified land u
- 19-
, drelinin-r Stdf Rekenciation 0
TO provi.de guidmce for Vne preparation ad review Of the loca?. zoning Od
staff recormencis tbab the city present a proposed revision of the land use for Cession re-viex ad appraval containing specific design standads and
cies for the shoreline sea. Suggested standards are set forth in the foU
pecel-bypzrcel anal-pis .
3. SDecific Pulcel-by-F2rcel Access ~r3 Desim Reccrmendeticns
Pursuant to staff recornendzticns set forth iz~ t'le previous two sections, z
requirements md dgsig criteria should be spscified as pat of t'ne City) s 1
plan, To give the City guidarlce in making the necessary plan re-~sicns, tk
following discussion ~~5ll-l presext on a pzccel-by-parcel basis: (1) staff rc dations for specific access decLications where the rewernents differ from
overall 50 foot access easexent with a 25 foot building setback descr2bed z
(These specizl access recgixeqents derive either from the ?otsntial offerec
spec7L.fi.c tyypes of use, frcm public trust uld prescriFti-JE: rlghts cpesticns!
from waterfront use requirements of Secticn 30221 of the Act,); ad (2) sta:
smgestions fcr design criterfa (as opposed to requirements). For ezse, of
the access/des& relationships for each parcel can be ncre readily exai;;lim
North Shore Parcels Adjacat to & East of CZl:jbad Elid: The i
Hedionda Specific ?la &-ea contains several ozcels zdjacent to Carl: Boulevard between Tm-zrack Avenue md the Iagooz thzt :dse shzz1y fri
rodmy. %e Specific Pla propcses residen~al -a&. jlensity (XI) or 30 dxelling units per acre for these RZCC~~S, To protzct the sce-dc q vimal qalitLzs or" Czlsbad Boulevarh wad Carlsbad Stat.te "Deach? the j
Codssia has recornended that developezt ~n these b:Luff-tcF sarcsl set bzck a sufficient distmce fmm Carlsbad Bculevzrd to ensue the : Sion of an adecpatz landscaped buffer. The ccndil2.cn dso requkes d
mat to be low-prox'ile to prevent adverse viaal ivcts.
Eowsver, to provide clez pidace for the iAqlementztlon phase, ths cm&tion should be rexx5ttsn to incoqorate the b~l6lr,g mad access;^
design stadarcis approved by the State Conx5ssion in the Seav5ew D~XT along with its Froposed extasion betxeen Sea.;isx a12 the I.agoo;n {M
E). In adfition, it is suzgested that 2 luldscaped 75-foot seY~2ck b provided dong the proposed &endon of the accesstfzy, u;d tkt the first line of development be IizLted to onestory;' The City of 2zlS
s-1~1 consider lidti-% the remaining develcpent to t-d+storles. I
designed, development of 'these parcels wcula be consistat with Secti
30251 of the Act, would be visua2l.y ccngztible ~dth the charactey of
gurrounciing weas, mxi :md.d be ccnsistent 3Lth ~re~cus pm5t ac"Ac the State and Regional CdsSions (e.g. Se2dew Cor_dcdrLums).
standing, staff has presented this discussion on a parcel-by-parcel bzsL 'S E
a.
b. Sa Ciezo Gas & l51ectfic (SLGZ3) Parel, ~o+~h shore or' thEf fi - kEOOE - Thki SiU acre is located adjacer;t -4 the noel1 &ore ~f +,hz (
lagoon i.?n.e&&ely east of Czrlsbaa 31~3. Cne po,rti~~, of the Fropert: consists ol" ltvel lmd, ad the other is a stte~ exba2ment ab-u~+~~g 1
'lagoon. Singh+&?d-mul~pl? fmfily developent ac;&n the sit3 to th:
north and east. The parcel is accessible only from CkrfL.dd .?i.jezue & to it3 elevation above Carlsbad Avexque. The -\,%a H&(,nda Speciz"i,c p:
-20-
i
designates the steep a portion of the property as d)r en space and the lev< portion for Residential High Density (20 to 30 du/ac).
The Regional Commission attached Co~fition No. 5 which calls for develc ment on the subject parcel to be unobtrusive in Size and location, to 1 setback a sufficient distance from the bluff edge, to be vrlowprofile.'
To asme that the Specific Plan is precise enoug& to develop the implc
mentation zoxxing ordinance for this parcel, it is suggested that -devel mat on the upper portion of this parcel be set back a minimum of 75 f
fmrfi the bluff edge and be limited Lo twGs6oS-Ein Xsght. In addit the eSsti~-€raiI. running along the edge of the lagoon-shoal- be the
- backbone of the public a.ccessway with grading limited to provide a pav
10-12 foot combined pedestI-ian/bike path and a safety fence.
Ecke Parcel, North Shore Outer Lagoon - The Ecke Parcel is 6.6 in size and lies adjacent to the north shore of Agua Hedionda's outer
close to the thermal discharges of the &una Power Plat into the oc:
The site is relatively flat, with a 35 foot high emballanat along its
perimeter and 10 foot high embankment adjacent to the lagoon. The sit abutted by residential uses, predominantly single-family with some MU:!
family, to the north. The property is accessible only through the st1
the adjacent residential neighborhood to the north. The Agua Hediond: Plan proposes Residential MedimHigh Density ( 10 to 20 dwelling unit:
. acre) for the Ecke Parcel.
The Regional Comnrission attached Condition No. 6 which calls for the vation of this property for aquaculture use (pursuant to Section 3025:
Act gLVi~g priority to coastal-dependent developments) .
To enswe that the Specific Plan provides sufficient ,&dance for dev
the implementing zoning ordinmces, the condition attached by the Reg
Comrr6ssion should be modified to reqire that a minimum 100 foot stri: land be free of buildings. At least fifty feet should be dedicated a for public access with separate bike and pedestrian paths ad the rerr
should be landscaped. If aquaculture uses are not developed on the e the entire 100 ft. wide strip should be located along the shoreline.
aquaculture uses are developed on the pmpsrty, this stlip may not be feasiblg. provided immediately adjacent to the shoreline, but could in
be located around the aquaculture faulities. Design criter5.a Wges
consideration by Carlsbad include stepping residenb-al development fr
story where it is closest to the Shore, to a maximum height of-two st
Pawsayo, North Shore fiddle Lagoon - The Papagayo parcel to1
appra3dmately 24 acres and is located adjacent to the north shore of
middle lagoon. The site is gently sloping with a steep embankment IT
down to the edge of the Lagoon. As with the Ecke parcel, the only a( to the parcel is through the streets of an adjacent residential neigl; hood to the north. Approximately 3.5 acres have already been develol
with 50 condcmi~um units. 3.2 acres of the lagoon-front property wz
dedicated for public use pursuant to the rewrements of the 1972 Co:
Act in Appeal Mo. 81-73'. The SpecifTc Plan proposes Residential Medi
High Density (10 .to 20 dwelling units per acre) for -the Papagayo 0'.
An alternative land use evaluated in the EIR for the Speci'fic Plan W
density residential.
__
..
C.
d.
-21-
\
0 0
The Regional Commission attached Condi-LLon No, 7 calling for deve of the property to be sited and desiped to be visually unobtrusi to Secti.cm 30251, ~dth sufficient setback from the ir-side edge of posed xcess easement dlcng the bluff to provide an adequate land
buffer, and with &the developmerit to be lowprofile to prevent adv vis~dl impacts. The ~nly aicess reauirenmts in the Regional coir conditions zre the iqrovewn-k of a; xr:! well-look park to be 1
the level lad 13~7r;msly dx5czted near the cul-de-sac of HLnbor
and a public access stairwy zo %ne water's edge ard providons f
To ensure consistency :tith ths Coastzl Act urd to provide the bas
the implaentation ordinances, the Regioml Commisecn condition
modified. As noted earlier, the policies of tltle Coastal Act @.re priority to recreakional use of oceznfront propsrty. High densit
deneal use on th: Papagayo site would be in conflict With these
unless an adewate ana is dedicat.ec? for pblic recreational usso
the intensive resident3-al developnext proposed for the Papagayo r: and the lagom locatLon of ths parcel, it seems clear thak additi
public use areas should be reserved adjacent to the existing 3.2 dedication. The lm-d zlong the bkff beheen the sewer easernen% e;xisting dedication is me of the few level zeas almg the mer
shore which is suitable for recrezLLcr,& use as a view &te. It one of thz fex areas where it ?add be Fossible to prc-Jide XA6te
for public use of the shoreEne wEch, under SectLon 30212.5, shcr:
distributed throughout m area to rritiigate against arlva'se iqac
Thus, an addi+ional dedic&ion shocld be re@red almg *&e blttff Papagzyo property. me dedication shdd ir,clude a trapezdd shs of land betxeen the edge of the existirig dedicztion uld a Erie ri parallel to the bluff which intersects idth the ad of the HZ~OK
c~l-de-szic. (See Exhitit F). me c~-&+sac -ea sficulci be enla remodeled to provide 10-15 spzces for WbXc parld.~. While locz
have been raised &out, the prov;isbn cf public par!-cirig =cas, ay
other waterfront areas has shmn that the absmcs of public park5
the public to use residential. streets for par'khg.
Eth respect to design criteda for the Pig2gzyo property9it is E that the City cocsidar rewring that the 2rst Em of buil&ng:
the new dedicaAien be cne-s%ory in oder to soften- their Visu2l i the Lagoon and the public view site. It is zlso suggested that c
be set back at least 50 feet from tne lad=& edge or" the public and tip? bluff edgP and A&zt the n&m h&&t of develqne-?t, on
be tw-stories at, grade.
Snug Hmbor. Aorth Shore Imey Zaeocn - The Spa Harbor 2 approximztelg seven acres in ~5z;e.w-d shpes gaduUj ?o~m from
ad Adws Streets to the lqocn edg?. It is zidjacent to ad easi
and is highly vidble frcrn the brighway aslcf the lagoon. The E?Zi :
adequate accss exits zo the site via Adas md Hareson Street.
is currently developed as a boat lmcbi~ .sit,e xiCh anci-j fi
The Specific Pla desigmtss the Smg XarSor ea for commercid.
he 02 "the inoro, iLgor,z?t altern2tive uses dLscussed in the X!X i
the qmsion or' the comnerctal recrosti.cn use to I-Ioover Strcet.
e.
-22-
0 0 \
.I
Staff suggests that the City consider reqgiling that any new developmer this area be subordinate to existing land forms, not black public view: ward from Harrison Street and Adams Street, and retain &sting mature
trees.
,f. Area Between the Eucalptus Row ad Hoover Street Access - Tki: contains appraxirnately three acres and is sirriilar in topography to the
Harbor pacel. The Specific Plan designates tk site for medim densi residential development (3-0 to 20 dwelling units per acre).
Regional ccmdiEon No. €3 requires this area to be reserved for recreat
use. If commercial recreation is developed an the site, & acre of Waf front land should be reserved for the provision of a public use area i
Support facilities for public boat launching adjacent to Hoover Street
Suggested design criteria are that development.be stepped such that bl
closest to the accessway are only-one-story, with a m;udmwn height of stories.
g. Hedionda foint - The Hedionda Point area extends generally be- Hoover Street access and Whitey's Landing. The land rises very steep at slopes of 2% to 4% from the shoreline to Adams Street. The Spec Plan calls for medium densLty residential development (10 to 20 dwell
units per acre).
!%e Regional Comnrission in Condition No. 9 reqrrired development in tk
to observe adequate set'backs from the access easement, to be lo-+prof
and clustered to errsure the provision of useful view corrtdors. It i
proposed that disturbance of the natural land fonns be Minimal by.rec
structures to be located md designed to f5.t the natural contours. 2
recommends that the Regional Commission conditions be modified, to ir
more specific criteria.
He&onda point is one of the most criticdl developable parcels a thl
&ore of Agua Hedionda from both a Vimal and physical impact StadP'
merefore, design of development on it, whether residential Or COmm?
recreationp must be phnmd and desiGed to Compliment the &goon's
to protect it from adverse physical impacts resdeng during and aft construceon, ad tc~ &nriae public enjoyment Of its water's edge*
&cep% for the bowl-shaped area in the middle of the point, the grm the area drops at well over 2% between Adams Street and the shore3
development located in this area will. block OF &srupt views from Ac Street, the nearest public street, to the lagoon and GU likelyin on potential prescriptive rights areas. Providi~ automobile acces
developments along this area, particularly in sight of the Curve O* poses severe design constraints. Proeding dsdnage for developmen
increasing sedimentation into the lagoon also presents serious desi
Cmsequently, development of Hedionda Point should be limited to tk weas ne= the fiddle of the paint and the s'knollaf in between the t
making multi-story design possible with rear andlor roof parking ta off Adams Street. Land coverage by structures on Hedionda Point SI
exceed 2% of the net land area, excluchg se&red de&cations fo!
access.
-23- ..
I
.e e
h. Vhitev's Lanfinz to Bristol Cove - Whiteyws Landing md
land adjacent to Bristol Cove rise moderatslg from the lagoon sh
Specific Plan desinates T1Jhite.J'~ LincErg for cammercidl-recreat the parcels djacent to Eristol Cove for med2um resideAtid. deve
10 to 20 dxeUj-rg units per acre,
In rev5.eTkcg the hd imediately adjecent to the shor?E?l-e, thz Commission ciid not imgose any conditions on the development of t
properties. However, because of the locat5on or" these pwcels,
criteria qpear mpropriate and necessLzr to ensure develogent ~th the Coastal Act. Staff suggests tbt buil&i.ngs be stepped
development closest to the accesswzy is Er6ted to on-stoq in
the maxim hdghi; of buildings Xrdted to two-stories. No deve
shdd be allowed until a specific detezdnat5.on. has been made t
prescriptive rights in the area have be22 protected in xcordac
Section 30211 of the Coastal Act or tbat ec@.ml-enl acccss wzas designated, On the rernzLniT pzrcels to tb2 esst, devel.opmm% 5
occur belox the &sting bluff line uld. should be set back a min feet fron the edge of the bluff. The accessday should be cies5.g
the parcels to connect 7.rit.h Cove Drivv3. in comectian with the accessway should be considered for th5 fl
adjacent to Cove Drive pihare sabstantial exidsnce of prescriptiv
exists.
Bristol Cove - B-ristol Cove is c?n ex?.s+;ing n&na devela The Spec5.13~ P1.a czL!.s for Zgh d
A smll public parking
5;
hz.s dredged out of ciry lad. dential dsvelopmat of 20 to 30 &deU?z u~&ts per acre.
Stpff recormends that, Id3.U develcpnmt is Bristol Cove be of a coqatibl? with developat on either side of a propxed Froject
Steer, SIOU~ Ares ~ast and West of ~esto~. COTS - (fnch
Hillsides below Pw~xriia) - The Specific Plz? d.esigm;r;es these i!
medium rssidential densi-ly of 0 to 4 dweEng tmits per acre. *
The Regiaal Car;jrrrssion ciid not specii"i.cdly address these parce or crmdittons, Zlthcxzg?? developiat hers wtild have a stibstm*A~ on the &goon bacIcd_rq. The pading m-d scenic p-rsservation rec
the Act require Jiinitiz~g development dmsitics to 1 du/zc.
Ferrso (XCA) ad 'LB Prooez5t5-e~ - These ttio prcper-t.de
beWeen Eristoi COVE? zqd the iiellf p~opercy. Bo"& parcels have
tially filled, but may be subject to the @lie trust. The Spec
proposes medium high residmtial dendtLes of 10 to 20 chelling acre.
Regional Ccdssion Cm6t;ian No. 77 requires the provision of i
buffers between my develqmwAt and the adjacent ~Jildlife presex
that the size uld height of developrnst be at a cocqai;ible ac&
Staff recomemisthat development of &these prqerties be no more stories in height ad be designed to pAmvi.de subst&$Ld view cc
j.
-
k,
-24-
i *.
1
toward the lagoo~anaunting to no less t& haof the width of each
of the properties. In acidition to the standard access requirement, th
access from Marina Drive to the shoreline should be 50 ft. fide, With 25 ft. building setback; and a $ acre land area, with a 30 ft. road ac
easement to Park Drive, should be reserved for a support parking fau9
for a possible future boat launching ramp between the two parcels.
1. SK&E (South Shore Coimercial ProDerty West of 1-51 - Tixis sit
is located at the Cannon Road off rarq on the west side of the freewa3
contains approximately 6 acres. The Specific Plm designates it for r
cial uses.
The Regional Commission did not specifically address the development I
property in its findings or conditions. To preserve the unobstructed
view from 1-5 staff recommends that development of this property be sl
1W ft. from the edge of the lagoon.
Pannonia Park -- The Agua Hedionda Specific Plan designates t Pannonia ~te for single--family residential use at 0-4 d.u./ac. A one
acre *?overlooktt public park is also proposed.
In approving the conver:zion of the Pannorka property to residential t
the Comrrd.ssion expanded the proposed overlook park from +acre to fit acres; however, it did not establish any criteria for its development
is recormended that the Specific Plan rewre that, if the Pannon5.a 1 is allowed to convert, at least 5 acres of usable land area be dedicl
improved, with a coastal overlook and @cnic &-ea to coverno less th
total area, including associated parzng, and ydth the remainder of .
improved With playground and playfields areas to serve local recreat needs. A public stairway should be provided conneceng the park .ab0
Park Drive below for enhaced shoreline access, along with parking f 25 cars, in accordance w5th Section 30212.5. Accsss roads to the Pa
Park should be of sufficient width and well-signed to ensure rnax3-m access to the park and shoreline below. The plan should affirm the
Entent to accept the Park's dedication, specify who will pay for the
improvements, and ensure that it will be provided for public use in rhth the development of the Pannorfia property.
m.
n. Community Park - The proposed Community Park site is Pocatec
south shore of the lagoon on lands wMch are now in agricultural pr.
The actual reservation of land envisioned to accommodate the gropos is 20 acres.
The Park and Recreacon Element of the City of Carlsbadqs-General P fies the Community Park site as being the "Hub" of the City's recre
The City's position is that the Community Park is centrally located tion, extensive utility easements and canyons make it possible to c
Community Park with every other park in the City. Activities planr
a community center, theatre arts building, basebfi fields, and ter
-25-
In reviewing tt ca Community Park, the Regiohal &sdcn modified the
Plan’s proposed development, concept by requiring that the pzk include
passive uses such aspicdc’kng, trails, wd pocket beaches, with acce:
provided by boat, by pedestriulbcycle tr&l that could connect with
&sting terminus of Cmnon Road provided that no conversion of agria
lands is necessitated, or by pedestrian/bicycle trail on the existing
mad just south of -the F-gula Heciionda Creek (Kelly Drive).
In order to ensure the desigii plans for improvements of the park are c tent with the objectives of the Coastal. Act, the Specific Plan should. a detailed site plan defineding aeas within the Commriity Pa-k born-c
where the public shdd have liinited or no access, aqd where alteratic
PancEorms including Mitigation me2suTes to avcid. erosion and seciiment: are proposed. The boundaries of the pmk nay ha.ve to be adjusted ta i
conflicts ~th agricultural uses or wetlad resources.
e
-. -.
-26-
---. _._ - ---_
___ . -.-
- __ . . . . - -- _. ._-_ ...-. . .. . - ..- - .I ...____.___.. ... . -......... -.... .. - .-
..
..
- .. . . . .
*
..-f
rl)
3* ,; uri( 5:
, .. . ...x