HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-11-13; City Council; 6059; Process for preparation of LCPCITY OF CARLSBAD
AGENDA BILL KO. (j O S f
DATE: November 13, 1979
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
Subject:
PROCESS FOR PREPARATION OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PLAN
Statement of the Matter -- •
AB 462 (Mello), which amended the coastal zone boundaries in Carlsbad
and other places, was signed by the Governor on September 27, 1979.
A late amendment to the bill also took the extraordinary step of
providing for the future exclusion of certain properties from the
coastal zone unless a local coastal plan (LCP) for those properties
is approved by October, 1980. On previous occasion, the City
Council formally indicated its desire that the Coastal Commission
prepare the local coastal plan for that portion of the coastal zone
within Carlsbad jurisdiction.
City and State Commission staff members have been communicating on
the procedures for preparation and review of the LCP, and on the
effect of the time constraints included in the Mello Bill. State
staff have assumed the responsibility for moving ahead with a program
for development of the LCP, pursuant to the prior Council determination
and confronted with a short time limit imposed by the Mello Bill
Communications with the State Commission staff have not been as clear
and firm as would be desired. However, the Commission has maintained
that City review of the LCP preparation is desirable and important.
Toward those objectives, the Commission staff is proposing that
Carlsbad participate in the selection of the LCP consultant. Additionally,
the Commission would provide funds for the City to hire a staff member
to coordinate with the consultant on the preparation of the LCP. As
the Commission staff will be distributing Request For Proposals to
prospective consultants this week, the time for response to the Com-
mission is short.
The importance of the coastal zone area to the entire community of
Carlsbad is readily apparent. The desirability of the City's
participation in preparing the LCP is equally important but less
apparent. The importance lies in the need for having an LCP prepared
and approved that is compatible with the overall growth and develop-
ment plans for Carlsbad; in which the issues are identified and
understood before the plan is completed; and in completing the
preparation, review and approval process as speedily as practical.
The Commission staff's proposal that Carlsbad participate in selecting
the consultant and provide a staff member (at state expense) to work
on a day-to-day contact with the consultant will provide the means for
achieving the desired coordination.
November 13, 1979
Page 2
Exhibit
1. Letter from California Coastal Commission dated September 19,1979
2. Letter from California Coastal Commission dated October 5, 1979
3. Memo from Planning Director to City Manager dated November 9, 1979
Recommendation
Direct staff to respond favorably to Coast Commission proposal
to prepare implementing recommendations for Council action.
Council Action:
11-13-79 Council directed staff to respond favorably to Coast Commission's
proposal to prepare implementing recommendations for Council action.
State of California, Edmund G. Br<, , Jr., Governor
California Coastal Commission
631 Howard Street, 4th floor
San Francisco, California 94105
(415)543-8555
September 19, 19X9\p
°x
Mayor Ronald C. Packard
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mayor Packard:
I want to explain our role in formulating the/final version of AB 462 which affects
LCP planning in your city. As you probably know by now, the Legislature has di-
rected the Coastal Commission to prepare an LCP for certain specified properties
within the City of Carlsbad. Attached is a copy of the language adopted by the
Joint Assembly-Senate Conference Committee.
Initially, let me make clear that this approval was not our idea. The day before
the Conference Committee met, Peter Douglas, my deputy, was directed to come up
with a compromise solution to total exclusion. He did so. His proposal, however,
was limited to the preparation of a land use plan by a certain date. That alone
would then have been submitted to the City for adoption and implementation. The
Committee did not deem this approval adequate because it did not ensure adoption
by the City. As a result, additional language was drafted by Committee staff^
which requires the Coastal Commission to prepare and adopt an LCP for these
properties. On adoption of the LCP for the specific properties, this LCP will
be deemed certified and will go into effect without the need for adoption by the
City.
Peter went to great pains to point out to the Committee the ramifications of this
approval and stressed that their approval represents a significant departure from
that established by the Coastal Act of 1976. Despite that clarification, the
Legislature proceeded to adopt the attached language. The Coastal Commission did
not support that approach, although we did not oppose it either. We simply made
it clear that the decision raised a major policy issue for the Legislature to
determine.
It now appears we will have to live with the Legislature's action. Since the
time limits in the bill are extremely tight, we intend to proceed as quickly as
possible. At the same time, we believe it is imperative that we work closely
with the City in preparing the LCP segments for the AB 462 specified lands.
During the next several weeks, we will have to assign staff to the work we are
now charged with. I intend that our staff work closely with the City and
the Regional Commission on every step of this planning effort. Toward that end,
I have asked Bob Lagle, the Commission's Chief Planner, to meet with City and
Regional Commission staff to get the job underway as soon as possible. The
Mayor Ronald C. Packard
Page Two
September 19, 1979
fact that the Legislature saw fit to change the rules does not in anyway alter
my commitment to making sure the product is one the City can approve and im-
plement.
I regret the legislature decided to take this approach/to LCP planning for
portions of Carlsbad. But now that they have, I hone we cajr'aT] work together
in a spirit of cooperation to complete a good job.
MICHAEL L. FI!
Executive Director
cc: Dorill Wright, Chairman, CCC
Donald Benninghoven, League of Cities
Thomas Crandall, Executive Director, San Diego Coast Regional Commission
Bob Lagle, CCC
State of California. Edmund G. C^own Jr.. GOV
California Coastal Commission
631 Howard Street. 4th floor
San Francisco. California 94105
(415)543-8555
(Ll-k OY
October 5, 1979
James C. Hagaman
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mr. Hagaman: " ,. .
/
As you know, since your City Council's request in December 1978 that we prepare
the LCP for the balance of the City of Carlsbad (other than Agua Hedionda), we
have worked with you on the possibility of a reconsideration of this decision.
While I believe we have made significant progress in.resolving some mutally ;
acceptable solutions to the Agua Hedionda area, time has been running against
the legislative deadline for completion of the total LCP. In addition, mean-
while, the Legislature enacted the Mello bill (AB 462) which makes the Commissiorj
responsible for developing the LCP for certain properties adjoining Batiquitos
Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad.
In view of the limited remaining time and the now mandated Commission respon-
sibility for major portions of the Carlsbad coastal zone, we believe it" is most
efficient for us to proceed with the planning for the area in accordance with
your City's request. Working very closely with the City, we will have a con-
sultant prepare a total LCP (land use plan and implementing ordinances) for the
Carlsbad coastal zone, with the Batiquitos Lagoon properties separable for
possibly faster completion (to meet the Mello bill deadline of October 1, 1980);
this area will also be procedurally different, since it becomes effective auto-
matically upon Commission certification.
Our preparation of the LCP will be nearly the same as if the City were preparing
its own LCP. We will, in addition to the consultant contract, fund the City for
staff support as needed to coordinate with the consultant and Commission. The
LCP prepared by the consultant will still require City Council approval before
Coastal Commission certification (except for the area subject to the Mello bill).
Since there is little time to meet both the Mello bill and Coastal Act deadlines
for completion of Carlsbad's total LCP, we have already begun the consultant
selection process, with the enclosed invitation to interested consultants.
Next week v/e will begin drafting revisions to the Carlsbad LCP work program.
At our meeting with you on October 17, 1979, we can discuss how to proceed on
finalizing the work program. Our tentative schedule is: (1) By the end of
October, we will send a Request for Proposals, with a revised work program,
to consultants who appear, most qualified for this work; (2) After receipt of
proposals, we (state and regional Commission staff) together with City staff.
•• •Mr. James C. Hagaman
October 5, 1979
Page Two
would interview and select the consultant, hopefully by December 7, 1979; and (3)
If possible, we would concurrently have the City and the Regional and State
Coastal Commission review and approve the revised work program and funding for
both consultant and City support time. The regional review could be scheduled
November 9 or November 16; State Commission review could be November 19-21.
We look forward to working with you on this challenging and important LCP.
Please let us know if you have any suggestions or problems with the approach
I've outlined.
Sincerely,
Robert B. Lagle
Chief Planner
RL/nc
cc: San Diego Regional Coastal Commission
State Coastal Commission
Senator Craven
Senator Campbell
Assemblyman Frazee
Assemblyman Hello
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 9, 1979
TO: Wayne Dernetz, City Manager
FROM: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director
RE: LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
Planning staff previously presented the progress for the Mello Bill,
AB 462, to the City Council and discussed the various aspects
being considered by legislation. After adoption fo the bill, we
have been able to confirm that the area around the Palomar Airport,
including the Palomar Industrial Park and the Japatul property,
has been excluded from the Coastal Zone. In addition, as previously
indicated, a major portion of our proposed redevelopment area has been
excluded. Of particular importance to the City is that three
properties, commonly known as Ayers, Occideritial arid Standard
Pacific, have had special consideration applied by the legislature.
The legislature has requested that the Coastal Commission and staff
prepare a full Local Coastal Plan on the properties by October 1,
1980, including certification thereof or the properties will be ex-
cluded from the Coastal Zone. In discussions with the Coastal
Commission staff is is our joint opinions that
it is not reasonable to isolate particular properties
while ignoring adjacent property in the development of a Local
Coastal program.
Therefore we have concluded, in light of the City Council's recent
request that the Coastal Commission prepare the City's LCP, that
a single consultant be selected to do the Carlsbad LCP with a
proviso in the contract allowing seperate and accelerated work
on those three parcels identified by the Mello Bill in order to
meet the October 1, 1980 deadline.
In a letter dated October 5, 1979 (attached) from Robert Lagle he
presents a tentative schedule which is, for the most part, being
adhered to as of now. There are, however, several aspects of
the process we feel the City Council should be advised of and
which the Council should either express concurrance with staff's
appraoch or advise staff as to how they wish us to proceed.
1. We have requested that the request for proposals be sent to
consultants which have been reviewed by us prior to release.
Staff is in the process at this time and a list should be in
our offices prior to your meeting.
2. As of this date staff has worked with Coa'stal staff on the
major list of consultants that will be sent an RFP. We have
requested, in addition, that the City Manager of Carlsbad be
authorized to select the consultant from the Coastal Commission,
and have been advised that this is not possible, since the
Coastal Commission, in fact, hires the consultant responsible
for the consultant. However, staff indicated that they won't
recommend any consultant who we do not agree to.
3. Mr. Lagle indicates that the Coastal Commission will fund
the City for staff as needed for co-ordination with
the consultant and commission. We have received verbal
indications that the funds can be advanced to the City for
a special staff person to co-ordinate significant activities
expected in the Coastal Zone. There should be correspondence
to this effect early this next week. Staff agrees with this
approach.
It is expected that the City and Coastal Commission will work
closely with the consultant in the development of the RFP. We
feel any significant issues which have been debated by Council
will merge as aprt of the process and we will endeavor to help
the City Council stay informed as to findings of the consultant.
It is expected at this time that the RFP will be awarded at the
December 18 meeting of the Coastal Commission, at which time they
will also approve an amended work program.